USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
URBACT II
(2007 - 2013)
Application Form
Final Application Form Thematic Networks - P II - 2012
Priority-Operation 2-1
Attractive and Cohesive Cities
Exchange and learning
USER Phase II
Changes and conflicts in using public spaces
Submitted version
URBACT Secretariat
5, rue Pleyel
93283 Saint-Denis Cedex
Tel: +33 (0)1 49 17 46 02
Fax: +33 (0)1 49 17 45 55
Email: a.bucella@urbact.eu
Submitted version
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Table of contents
- I - (I) PROJECT IDENTITY
1
1. (I.1) Project title, Lead partner and duration
2. (I.2) Updated summarised description of project and issue addressed
3. (I.3) Partnership
4. (I.4) Project cost
1
1
1
2
- II - (II) SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT PHASE ACHIEVEMENTS
3
1. (II.1) List of Activities implemented during Development Phase
2. (II.2) Definition of the issues to be addressed by the project
3. (II.3) Summary of partners’ situations, expectations and potential contributions
4. (II.4) Coherence of your partnership
5. (II.5) EAP recommendations
3
5
7
14
14
- III - (III) WORK PACKAGE 1 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT
16
1. (III.1) Lead partner management team
2. (III.2) Activities to be implemented under work package 1
3. (III.3) Partners’ Involvement in work package delivery
4. (III.4) List of expected deliverables under work package 1
16
17
18
20
- IV - (IV) WORK PACKAGE 2 – TRANSNATIONAL EXCHANGE AND LEARNING
24
1. (IV.1) Organisation of the exchange and learning process
2. (IV.2) Activities to be implemented under work package 2
3. (IV.3) Partners’ Involvement in work package delivery
4. (IV.4) List of expected deliverables under work package 2
24
26
29
31
- V - (V) WORK PACKAGE 3 – IMPACT ON LOCAL POLICIES AND PRACTICES
34
1. (V.1) General Framework of activities to be implemented under work package 3
2. (V.2) URBACT Local Support Groups at partner level
3. (V.3) Participation in transnational activities at network level
4. (V.4) Participation in national capacity-building scheme
5. (V.5) List of expected deliverables under work package 3
34
36
43
44
46
- VI - (VI) WORK PACKAGE 4 – COMMUNICATION AND DISSEMINATION
48
1. (VI.1) Communication Strategy
2. (VI.2) Activities to be implemented under work package 4
3. (VI.3) Project webmastering
4. (VI.4) Partners’ Involvement in work package delivery
5. (VI.5) List of expected deliverables under work package 4
48
49
51
52
54
- VII - (VII) MANAGING AUTHORITIES OF OPERATIONAL PROGRAMMES
57
1. (VII.1) Cooperation with Managing Authorities of Operational programmes (ERDF and ESF)
57
- VIII - (VIII) METHODOLOGY AND USE OF EXPERTISE
60
1. (VIII.1) Use of the expertise resources allocated by the Programme
2. (VIII.2) Use of the external expertise on the project budget
60
60
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- IX - (IX) PROJECT WORK PLAN
63
1. (IX.1) Project work plan
63
- X - (X) PROJECT DELIVERABLES SUMMARY
74
1. (X.1) Project deliverables summary
74
- XI - (XI) PROJECT FINANCE
85
1. (XI.1) Project finance
2. (XI.2) Legal basis for decision of funding
3. (XI.3) Expenditure per year and main budget line
4. (XI.4) Expenditure per year and source
5. (XI.5) Project cost per budget line
6. (XI.6) Expenditure breakdown per objective and main budget line
86
86
89
90
91
93
- XII - (XII) DECLARATION OF MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURE
95
1. (XII.1) Declaration of maximum amount of expenditure to be certified at the end of the Develo...
95
- XIII - (XIII) BANK INFORMATION
96
1. (XIII.1) Bank information
96
- XIV - (XIV) DETAILED INFORMATION ON THE LEAD PARTNER AND PROJECT ...
98
1. (XIV.1) Detailed information on the Lead partner and Project partners
98
- XV - (XV) SIGNATURE
109
1. (XV.1) Signature of the Lead Partner / project coordinator and of the Elected representative
109
- XVI - (XVI) ANNEX 1
110
1. (XVI.1) ANNEX 1 – Eligibility criteria for final application for thematic networks
110
- XVII - (XVII) ANNEX 2
111
1. (XVII.1) ANNEX 2 - Realisation indicators
111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- I - (I) PROJECT IDENTITY
1. (I.1) Project title, Lead partner and duration
Identification
Acronym
USER Phase II
Program reference
TN Call 3 - Phase II
Unique number (for search)
5550
Title
Changes and conflicts in using public spaces
Lead Partner
Grenoble Alpes Metropole agglomeration community (FRANCE)
Length of project
Start date
End date
2013-02-01
2015-04-30
2. (I.2) Updated summarised description of project and issue addressed
To face the challenges of metropolisation and post-carbon society, cities work on the Sustainable City of tomorrow. It must be
first a city serving the people, by being adapted to their changing ways of living. USER aims to link up urban regeneration and
conditions for an effective sustainability by a multi-dimensional approach involving residents and users of the city. USER
will focus on the role of public spaces to make a more (convivial, secure, friendly and efficient) liveable City.
3. (I.3) Partnership
Lead Partner
URBACT II
Partner Institution
Type of
institution
Convergence / Country
Competitivenes
s
Grenoble Alpes Metropole
agglomeration community
Local authority Competitiveness FRANCE
Zone
Rhône-Alpes
City of Malaga
Local authority Convergence
Zone
Andalucía
City of Pescara
Local authority Competitiveness ITALY
Zone
Abruzzo
City of Lublin
Local authority Convergence
Zone
POLAND
Lubelskie
City of Krakow
Local authority Convergence
Zone
POLAND
Malopolskie
SPAIN
Area
Page 1 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
City of Dresden
Local authority Convergence
Zone
GERMANY
City of Copenhagen
Local authority Competitiveness DENMARK
Zone
Danmark
Lisbon Municipality
Local authority Competitiveness PORTUGAL
Zone
Lisboa
City of Riga
Local authority Convergence
Zone
Latvija
LATVIA
Dresden
4. (I.4) Project cost
ERDF
Swiss Fund
Norway Fund
ERDF
Public total
financement
Swiss Fund
Public total
financement
Norway Fund
Public total
financement
541,877.00 €
189,693.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
URBACT II
Other
Financing
Total budget
0.00 €
731,570.00 €
Page 2 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- II - (II) SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT PHASE ACHIEVEMENTS
1. (II.1) List of Activities implemented during Development Phase
Many activities were implemented during Development Phase. If most of them were compulsory, we also want to highlight
specificities concerning USER.
KICK OFF MEETING (Grenoble / 21-22 June 2012) :
- Participants : 5 initial Cities (Grenoble Alpes Metropole, Malaga, Barakaldo, Pescara and Lublin), Lead expert and URBACT
Secretariate
- Objectives : to know each other better - to specify the focus of the project and the pilot Sites of partners Cities - to plan the
FAF preparation.
- Results : better understanding of the project by partners - changes in the scope of Pilot Sites for several Cities - improvement
on the focus.
ENLARGING PARTNERSHIP :
- Very complex issue mainly due to :
* the need to balance Competitiveness and Convergence Cities,
* impact of the economic crisis which made potential partners having difficulties to decide commitment on Territorial
Cooperation.
- On the other hand, the current context of economic difficulties has shown a big interest for USER topic, especially
concerning the need to control the costs of urban services and more generally to focus on efficiency.
- Setting up an application process for potential partners (Form with 6 questions of URBACT DoI and precisions on local
focus) :
* 15 serious bids analysed and evaluated => pre-selection of 8 partners before the final choice of 5 cities,
* Decision to stop the partnership with Barakaldo after discussions (during Site Visit and later) because the thematic focus of
USER which did not reach local objectives. Barakaldo was also in a situation to make a choice between 2 URBACT projects
for local reasons. We agreed, with Barakaldo, to stop the partnership at the beginning of September (see annexed letter of
Barakaldo).
=> Decision, at the end, to work with a partnership of 9 Cities, but with strong involvement to ensure the sustainability of their
commitment beyond administrative process. The partnership is for us more coherent (focusing on a same issue : public space
and role of users) but also enough diverse with 3 types of urban contexts.
SITE VISITS :
- Binomial Lead expert – Lead partner made together all 9 visits in order to ensure a high quality of mutual understanding.
Initially, we planned to visit together only the new partners, but we decided to do it for all partners because Kick off Meeting
showed the need of a closer exchange to ensure the coherence of their commitment.
- Objectives : to ensure that partners understand the frame and objectives of USER, to know local neighbourhood recognized
as Pilote Site, to agree on the focus and to give strategic informations concerning administrative and financial issues. Drafting
of a « Guideline for Site Visit and Partner Profile » (see annex brochure).
- organisation in 2 days with :
URBACT II
Page 3 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
* Day 1 : listening and exchanging: meeting project team, decision makers (politicians if possible) and local stakeholders, visit
of proposed Pilot site(s).
* Day 2 : working on the definition of partner profile, local involvement and definition of local project (project team,
administrative and financial, ULSG, choice of the Pilot Site)
- Results : strong improvement of the understanding of USER by partners and better focus at local level (Pilot Sites & ULSG
role) => Way to activate each partner to produce already a common network driving forces in prevision of the Final
Conference in Malaga.
The binomial Lead partner & Expert is also very united after this phase which needed a very good coordination. Each one
understands better its own role.
FINAL MEETING (Malaga/ 18-19 October) :
- Participants : 8 Cities (Krakow - not refunded - was unable to participate for financial reasons), Lead Expert, URBACT TPM
expert and local stakeholders.
- Objectives : validation of Baseline Study, agreeing on budget, finalising the Work Programme, the deliverables and outputs.
- Results :
1. Agreement on the USER focus and approach,
2. Agreement on the USER procedure and implementation methodology,
3. Shared understanding of the partners local challenges concerning public spaces,
4. First discussion on project (presentations of Grenobles' experience and CSTB approach) and political discussion (between 3
politicians).
CHANGES IN THE THEMATIC FOCUS :
- We had to take into account criticism from EAP, TPM and URBACT Secretariate on the difficulties to understand the topic
and the scope of USER.
- USER is a topic focused on methodological issues and keep this focus as cross cutting issue to "find new ways to conceive
and manage the City by taking advantage of the practical knowledge of users".
- Meantime, we have worked to clarify the thematic focus by defining a scope on "changes and conflicts in the use of public
spaces to improve them in a sustainable way". Because Public spaces are crucial places of expression of social mix and
dysfunctions, the topic became very much mobilizing for partners.
- The reformulated topic is more concrete with 3 clear sub-themes shared by all partners. It is now more pragmatic, but keep
the initial identity of the "role of users".
- The organisation of the Implementation phase is also clearer, with a better coordination between seminars and workshops.
1st ULSG MEETINGS FOR INITIAL PARTNERS:
- Grenoble (2nd of October) : presentation of the project and local issues linked with the project - Exchanges on issues at local
level, political commitment and possible impacts - Choice of Pilot Sites with the will (due to multiplicity of local initiatives) to
choose 2 Sites and to add some cross-cutting issues taking place elsewhere in the agglomeration.
- Malaga (4th of October) : Urbact local coordinator (Cristobal Gil) and URBACT project officer (Begoña Oliva) presented
the project: theme - work programme and goals - social and economic state of the art of the neighbourhoods Trinidad-Perchel
- Information about the Final meeting.
- Pescara (24th of July) : presentation of USER goals and method in resence of L/LE (in escara for the Sire Visit this day) -
URBACT II
Page 4 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Presentation of the objectives of the LAP - Exchanges on issues at local level, political commitment and possible impacts Links between the Fontanelle-Sambuceto Urban Regeneration Plan and the the USER Project - Visit of the choosen
neighbourhood.
- Lublin :(23th of October) : presentation of the USER project and the ULSG part to take in it - Presentation of the pilote sites
to be covered by the project - Presentation of some good practices in the revitalisation field in Lublin - Discussion on the
problems to deal with in the Stare Miasto (Old City) and Sródmieście (Downtown) districts.
COMMUNICATION :
- Creation of USER Webpages on URBACT Website,
- Creation of USER Graphic charter & logo (see annex),
- Definition of the Communication strategy (see WP4).
FINALISATION OF FAF DOCUMENTS :
- Baseline Study - finalisation after discussion on contents with all partners during Malaga's meeting.
- Final Application Form with annexes to specify some complementary elements.
CHARTER OF COMMITMENT :
- Taking into account URBACT Secretariate advice, we have decided to use the "Joint Convention" as basis of the "USER
Charter of Commitment".
- A draft is ready, adding requirements linked to local commitment like following the same approach, defining clearly who are
Users, implementing a local experimentation by following a common agenda, ...
- The "Charter of Commitment" will be finalized at the beginning of the Implementation Phase and signed by all partners.
USER ULSG HANDBOOK :
- The ULSG Handbook is a tool to give clear path to partners to implement local work linked to transnational exchanges,
- URBACT has created a ULSG toolbox, which will be integrated into "USER ULSG Handbook"
- Partners will agree on the ULSG Handbook during the first seminar of Implementation Phase (March 2013).
- A draft is already ready, integrating path for experimentation, description of users, ... in accordance with the baseline Study.
2. (II.2) Definition of the issues to be addressed by the project
• The policy challenge addressed by USER is linked to the ability of Policy makers and urban managers to make the City of
tomorrow a real sustainable city.
- USER will address this challenge through the issue of public space within the city. Public spaces are a very strategic question
because it is place were people meet and exchange. In the city of tomorrow decision-makers will have to cope with the need to
constantly adapt public spaces to changes and to prevent conflicts in using public spaces. This is the core of the USER project.
- This challenge will be developed around 3 sub-themes :
* more convivial and interactive social spaces to solve dysfunctions and conflicts of uses,
* safer public spaces in a friendlier city,
* cleaner and better maintained public spaces in a more efficient city.
URBACT II
Page 5 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- For us, the topic is linked to the involvement of stakeholders knowing by the practice and the daily use the way that the city
is living : the "users".
- The USER approach, on that side, is to define users as key-actors of this work. More than a citizen participation issue, USER
deals with empowerment of local stakeholders within the frame of improving and managing public spaces in our cities.
- USER wants, by creating a connexion between transnational exchanges and 9 local experimentations, to produce news
findings validated by the practice.
• The Political approach :
- Political involvement in the Project is one of the main key-elements which will ensure the success of USER. We have
decided to involve concretly politician from the beginning of the project with a first discussion between 3 politicians
(Grenoble, Malaga and Riga) during the Final Meeting of Development Phase (18th of October),
- 5 main assumptions were discussed between politicians :
* The crisis has to be understood as an opportunity to adjust urban services to the real needs of the people,
* In the context of crisis, it is fundamental to pay attention to places where people mix and meet,
* Public space are a place where people are concretly citizens because they need to share the space with other citizens,
* Fitting public space with changing needs is a real challenge for cities because neighbourhood's residents are not the only
ones who use it = need to adapt with the mix of uses,
* USER is for politicians an opportunity to introduce new stakeholders in the discussion and to listen more on what happens
on the field.
• The 3 URBACT cross cutting issues are totally part of the USER challenges:
- How to manage urban development in the context of economic and financial crisis : the financial reality of European cities
imposes to renew efficency in order to maintain a high standard of urban services. The current context needs to design more
efficient policies. Efficiency will be mainly linked to the ability to create flexibility to answer conflicts and adaptation to
changes in the City.
- How to foster integrated and sustainable approaches to urban development : Integrated and sustainable approaches needs
firstly a wide involvment of stakeholders. Urban development is not anymore a topic privatised by planners, but a democratic
issue on "How to live together in the City of tomorrow ?" On that point, public places are a crossroad of many dysfunctions of
the City and many solutions.
- How to develop efficient partnership and multilevel governance processes : The multilevel governance is more a concept
than a reality today because each level is focused on its own powers. We need to find new ways to gather partnership and to
find concrete solutions. USER will work on that.
• Added value of USER network : giving new ways to address the issue of improving uses and solving dysfunctions of public
spaces in a sustainable way. The "new ways" are related to the involvement of USERS in the process of conceiving and
managing public space.
• European Level interest linked with the EU 2020 Strategy :
- One of the concerns of the European Union is to find ways for more efficiency in public policies at local level. The
strenghthening of partnership at local level is a way to reach this concern.
- A second interest is linked with the goal of the European Union to develop Community-Led local Development (CLLD)
URBACT II
Page 6 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
issues with Structural Funds. By the activation of users, USER network will show good practices to involve local
stakeholders, considering their diversity, and to help them become key-actors of their local development.
- USER also wishes to give an added value for USER cities in order to help them showing to their Management Authority how
the User approach helps to develop an integrated approach focusing on neighbourhood. This approach could be a tool for
implementation of Integrated Territorial Investments (ITI) in ERDF Regional Operational Programmes 2014-2020.
3. (II.3) Summary of partners’ situations, expectations and potential contributions
Grenoble Alpes Metropole agglomeration community
• Local situation regarding the topic : important driving force on urban neighbourhood management with 7 Urban
Regeneration projects and development of common tool, the resource centre for neighbourhood management "House of
Inhabitants" - Need to mobilize local stakeholders on common issues to improve cross-cutting approaches of urban
regeneration and management - Important difficulties in several neighbourhoods in terms of public spaces uses and focusing
on very specific territories.
• Main expectations vis-à-vis the network : discovering new methods and practices - ensuring future of the "House of
Inhabitants" - Better dissemination of knowledge and know-how at local and regional level - more structured approach of
urban regeneration processes
• Issue/ problem we want to address through the Local Action Plan : ensuring better dissemination - better integration of users
within local processes of urban regeneration and urban management - Better methodological background for local
decision-makers and stakeholders.
• Benefits from the network & added-value to bring to the network :
- Grenoble will benefit of the good practices of partners and of a more structured approach which will be designed by the
network. It will give a new dynamic to local stakeholders.
- Grenoble will give to partners its own experience and good practices implemented for now more than 6 years on our
territory.
City of Malaga
• Local situation regarding the topic: In the 80’s, because of economic explosion of the country, certain areas of the city
stopped being attractive for living, creating an important phenomenon of immigration to new suburbs located on the outside of
the city. This process of depopulation was accelerated by the lack of investment by public authorities. From 1994, the
Municipality started a restoration and rehabilitation process promoting social, economic and environmental cohesion of part of
the historic centre. Nevertheless, target area alongside the historic city centre were excluded of the process. The
neighbourhood presents population under high risk of social exclusion, small incomes, roman settlement, high rates of
unemployment and education levels…
• Main expectations vis-à-vis the network:
- Sharing expertise with other partners developing strategies of rehabilitation on deprived neighbourhoods;
URBACT II
Page 7 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- Exchanging experiences regarding inhabitant’s involvement developed by other partners during rehabilitation processes;
- Learning expertise of how to keep rehabilitation processes going Structural funds ending.
• Issue/ problem we want to address through the Local Action Plan:
- Physical deterioration of urban environment: streets, squares, gardens, playgrounds, plots, facilities, …
- Promotion economic and social development in the area, managing urban environment as a productive element that creates
jobs and wealth for neighbours.
- Lack of permeability stopping transit both, inside neighbourhood and outside other parts of the city.
- Conflict in the use of public spaces such as squares, streets and plots.
- Marginal activities (part of residents) as drug sale, consumption, theft…
- Establishment of open discussion with Regional Government (Junta Andalusia) regarding “uses” of plots that after local
forced expropriation process were transferred to them to build public housing.
• How we can benefit from the network and what they can bring to the network:
Malaga will benefit :
- Setting up durable and strong dynamics of inhabitants empowering in rehabilitation process,
- Systems to establish PPPs (Private-public partnerships),
- Better qualification and training for civil servants, public workers and other staff working on the project,
- Improvement of skills and abilities of politician, stakeholders, and policy makers, benefits from the involvement in an
international project.
Malaga will give :
- Experiences in developing Integrated rehabilitation processes,
- Tools in process of inhabitants involvement: School of citizenship, Banks of time, Annual Assembly of URBAN Initiative
(URBAN III),
- Good practices in coordination European projects at local level.
City of Pescara
• Local situation regarding the topic:
- Need to improve the reconnection by the system of infrastructures and public spaces,
- Lack of private investments,
- Need to respond to different needs of citizens and city’s users,
- Lack of harmonisation between neighborhoods.
• Main expectations vis-a-vis the network:
- Improving results of urban regeneration
- New way to design public spaces
- Extend “Neighbourhood management” to all urban territories
- develop collaborative tools to implement projects
- Creation of frame and tools to increase effici! ency and evaluate neighborhoods management.
• Issues / problems we want to address through the Local Action Plan:
URBACT II
Page 8 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- improving knowledge and skills of local practitioners,
- Evaluation and follow-up of neighbourhood management efficiency,
- shaping a frame / methods for the future,
- new dynamic for local stakeholder.
• How we can benefit from the network and what they can bring to the network:
Potential contribution:
- local good practices,
- background on urban regeneration
City of Lublin
• Local situation regarding the topic:
- 4 years of implementation of regeneration programme show the mismatch between regeneration goals (needs) and
accessibility of funding for regeneration projects, especially projects depending on private initiatives.
- Progress of city development (new investments – regeneration of public buildings), new ideas on city management as a
process linked with citizens participation
• Main expectation vis a vis the network:
- exchange of knowledge in scope of regeneration processes
- exchange of the best practices (to drain good ideas and to implement checked solutions) and the worst practises (to not
commit the same mistake as others)
- buster the way of thinking about regeneration, and improve the maintenance of regeneration in Lublin
- develop cooperation skills through the trainings within the project
• Issues/problems:
- adjust activities of city life line to the ongoing changes (new development, economic changes)
new investments and suburbanisation process cause significant changes in Lublin. The dynamics
of investment makes it very hard to foresee evolutions on main areas of regeneration (the historical area of Lublin, city centre
under the preservation requirements
• How they can benefit from the network and what they can bring to the network
Lublin will benefit:
- improvement of knowledge and skills of city politicians, managers, city officers and municipal services, enterprises
managers in scope of regeneration,
- users participation in city management,
- revision of regeneration goals (after the 4 years of implementation of city regeneration plan),
- preparation of future regeneration projects
Lublin will bring:
1. review on city centre problems representative of Poland and Central Europe,
2. debate on urban management in a current stage of transition
URBACT II
Page 9 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
City of Krakow
• Local situation regarding the topic:
The Azory housing estate, dominated by multi-family housing (over 30% of the area) constructed using large panel methods.
The housing estate was designed in the 1960s, in accordance with the contemporary standards, as a typical urban “sleeping
district”. As a consequence, as an expression of the functionalism popular at the time, it is mono-functional, homogeneous,
lack of zoning, hard linear composition, lack of taking care of architectural and urban details.
• Main expectations vis-à-vis the network
- exchanging experiences with other partners developing strategies of rehabilitation on deprived neighbourhoods;
- exchanging experiences regarding inhabitant’s involvement developed by other partners during rehabilitation processes;
• Issue / problem they want to address through the Local Action Plan:
- preparation of the Local Regeneration Plan, as the basic strategic document, supporting the Local Regeneration Forum and a
tool for planning, realization and monitoring of the physical and social-economic space of the housing estate. It will include in
particular the target urban vision/concept of ordering the public spaces based on the detailed analysis of possibilities, costs and
benefits.
- preparation and adoption of the local spatial zoning plan – the basic spatial management instrument as an act of local law.
- creation of a common information platform as an instrument of integration for managing the housing estate and shaping
citizen's community.
- identification and elimination of basic conflicts, in particular ordering and regulating the legal status of the common spaces
and introducing legal-economic instruments that enable efficient administration
• How they can benefit from the network and what they can bring to the network
Krakow will benefit:
- of the good practices of partners and instructions and advices which will be designed by the network.
- Setting up durable and strong dynamics of inhabitants empowering in rehabilitation process,
- Better qualification and training for civil servants, public workers and other staff working on the project,
- Improvement of skills and abilities of politician, stakeholders, and policy makers, benefited by the involvement in a
multilingual and international project .
Krakow will give :
- Krakow will give to partners its own experience and good practices implemented for now more than 10 years on our territory
- Experiences in developing Integrated rehabilitation processes,
- Good practices in coordination European projects at local level
City of Dresden
• Local situation regarding the topic :
- Area at the western fringe of the city centre which has not undergone comprehensive regeneration since 1990, and which is
foreseen to meet considerable re-densification in the next years due to population increase in the overall agglomeration and a
promising location.
- Loss of unbuilt space will have to be counterbalanced by improving design and interlinking of public spaces.
URBACT II
Page 10 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- Specific demographic figures will have to be taken into account, as residential blocks with predominantly elderly people,
new-built town-houses inhabited by newcoming gentrifiers, old-established population largely depending on welfare benefits
elsewhere.
- Physical specificities: 2 subareas separated by a “railway barrier” and not well-accepted design as well as contested projects.
- Many people activated in social and cultural associations endeavoring for being included in urban planning issues, designing
spaces differenty with respect to users’ s needs as bottom-up place-making, urban gardening, robust and uncostly features etc.
- Various environmental problems.
- Future maintenance of public space is at stake.
• Main expectations vis-à-vis the network:
- It is an open-end process. Partners engaged in the LSG do not have to commit themselves to adopt each others views, but to
figure out to what extent they can harmonize their views for the benefit of the neighbourhood.
• Issue/ problem we want to address through the Local Action Plan:
- Analyze current regeneration plan for his area, which focuses on the upgrading of public space: are the municipal plans
appropriate and sustainable? Are there alternative or additional proposals originating from stakeholders and users?
• How can we benefit from the network and what can we bring to the network:
- A major aim is to improve the municipality’s and the stakeholders’ and users’ capacity to development common ideas and
proposals. A better mutual understanding and cooperation shall help minimize conflicts and make urban regeneration more
efficient.
City of Copenhagen
• Local situation regarding the topic:
- Sundholm is situated in a deprived area of Copenhagen, and is a part of an integrated urban renewal project;
“Sundholmskvarterts Omraadeloeft”. Sundholm is a complex of buildings and functions that all share the same public space,
but among themselves have very different purposes. -- Historically Sundholm has been a sanctuary for disadvantaged people.
And today many of the enterprises and institutions present in the area still focuses on disadvantaged groups. The area on the
other hand also represent artistic and recreational institutions and functions such an art gallery and a climbing club. Three child
care centres, the local political council and a new housing complex are all present or planned in the area. In total Sundholm
consists of more than 25 different actors.
- The urban development in the area will demand cooperation and good planning of urban space to assure the ability in the
area to adapt to new needs of sharing space among groups that are not necessarily coherent.
- The identified users in the area are: A variety of social institutions and their clients, a large group of homeless people, new
neighbours coming from outside and local residents from neighbouring dwellings. New residents and socioeconomic
businesses is under way, and the area is also a target for visitors and urban tourists. In the community garden, volunteers are
working together with homeless people, children from nearby schools and kindergarten and new socio economic enterprises
like “Copenhagen City Bee”.
• Main expectations vis a vis the network:
- Copenhagen is looking forward to be inspired by best practice in Europe, and with the supplement of high level academic
URBACT II
Page 11 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
support get the latest findings from the scientific world tailored for our specific needs.
- Copenhagen believe that an exchange of ideas and experience will raise not only our own level, but also give Europe an
advantage point in realising its urban potentials.
• Issues or problems we want to address through the Local Action Plan:
- Copenhagen has a long tradition for good quality physical urban planning and urban furniture. We now wants to integrate
the organization of urban life in our planning procedures. Our goal is to find a way to organize users of urban spaces in
partnership with the municipality. The task for this partnership will address themes like:
* Conflicts between very different type of users (e.g. Homeless vs mothers with babies, noisy young vs tranquilly adults)
* Better co-ordination among municipality bodies that exists in the area
* Integrate volunteers in the maintenance and further development of the urban spaces.
These points will be the main task for the LAP which will be developed in very close connection to other development plans
and policies regarding the area or the topics.
• How can we benefit from the network and what can we bring to the network?
- We expect to develop a model for local management of urban spaces, based on partnerships between municipality bodies,
local stakeholders, NGOs and citizens that can be duplicated in the City of Copenhagen and inspire other cities working on the
same agenda.
- We want to make a local action plan that supplements the traditional physical planning with a social and cultural perspective.
- Through the European dialogue we can enhance the quality and ensure a high level approach of ours and our partners work.
Lisbon Municipality
• Local situation regarding the topic :
- Horizonte and Nascimento Costa neighbourhoods have, bad housing conditions, ownership legal issues and are deprived of
public space, proximity infrastructures and equipments.
- It’s a disconnected territory with social/economic needs and deficiencies.
- The big gap between the real day to day users needs/problems and public response materialise the lack of integrated
policies/programming real implementation thru the past 40 years.
- It’s a excluded area from the city.
• Main expectations vi-à-vis the network :
- Exchange of practical field experimentations, and with this promote common bases and knowledge
- The development and sharing of the Local Action Plan under USER will allow to reflect and to obtain results on how the
build of a public space contributes to the promotion of social cohesion, especially in territories which present very peculiar
urban and socio-economic characteristics.
• Issue/problem they want to address through the Local Action plan
- the social and urban fracture between this area and the rest of the city, blocks the social cohesion and bring a cycle of social
exclusion.
- Distance between the local “users” and the urban planning decisions makers
URBACT II
Page 12 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- Gap between day to day needs/problems and municipality response
- Lack of social analysis when addressing urban design
- Lack of integrated policies/programming/implementation
- Lack of field real changes
• How they can benefit from the network and what they can bring to the networks
- The local users diagnosis will help to focus on the real issues, problems and conflits, and center/prioritise the response.
- Local partners activation and capacitation will allow the engagement and self response of community own problems.
- Will bring strong commitment to the proposals/solutions from all partners and local co-responsability. This will bring more
efficiency use to the resources, field projects implementation and coordination, management responsibility and accountability.
City of Riga
• local situation regarding the topic :
- Existing conflicts of uses among various kind of traffic flows (private, commercial, administrative, emergency services,
public transport, tourist coaches, bicycle and rickshaw flows, pedestrian movements) and their impact on public space.
- Impact of noise and other disturbing factors on all users of urban public space in the Old Town.
- Impact of divided ownership of land and buildings to the urban public space development issues.
- Lack of qualitative public consultation actively involving all interested parties. Harmonization of interests by public and
private parties, business and social needs.
- Due to budget and time restrictions lack of high quality investigations before decision making procedure.
- Insufficient linkage between planning process and budget allocation.
- No implementation programmes are elaborated and approved to iniciate and manage public space and related projects which
can positively influence the better use and deminish existing conflicts.
- Unclear division of responsibilities and insufficient authority of municipal institutions to ensure good management and
implementation of urban design projects.
- There is a lack of resources to maintain well public spaces – as well as lack of co-ordination and efficient management.
- Riga repeats the mistakes of many West European and North American cities in the past, where insufficient management of
commercialization and unlimited overwork has degraded the quality of the historical centre and its human nature.
• main expectations vis-à-vis the network :
- To achieve better designed, managed and maintained urban public spaces in our city – inviting, accessible for all groups of
users, secure and safe for everybody. To improve the overall quality of urban neighbourhoods – improve the quality of overall
urban space up-grade, daily and long-term maintenance.
• Issue/ problem they want to address through the Local Action Plan
- Drawing solutions for improvement of urban space in HCR introducing better – more efficient and flexible – public spaces
management.
- For instance, an implementation programme of Local Action Plan should be eleborated with involvement of local stake
holders, incorporated public and other stake holders’ responsibilities. LAP will be used in future for applying for finances from
other EU cofinanced funds to implement planned actions and projects.
URBACT II
Page 13 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- To improve land-use zoning regulations.
• how they can benefit from the network and what they can bring to the network
Discovering and showing similar challenges and possibilities of tackling them in other cities would rise awareness of local
stake holders and could strengthen political support for further development of citizens’ involvement in preparing of decisions
about development and inprovement of sustainable uses of public space and business activities which have impact on quality
of it as well as on living and business environment.
4. (II.4) Coherence of your partnership
When Grenoble Alpes Metropole decided to propose a project on URBACT linked to urban regeneration and management,
we decided to define few elements of City profiles we wanted to recruit:
- strongly involved in urban regeneration strategies,
- able to propose a pilot site for experimentation (physical neughbourhood with defined public spaces to improve),
- very good administrative and technical capacities to be able to reach URBACT requirements (which are huge) over the
duration of the project,
- diversity in terms of geographical situation (North - South / East - West),
- coherence in terms of size (from 250 000 to 600 000 inhabitants).
These requirements drove us to be very selective and to reject bids from cities which were not on the scope. The success of the
partnership will be mainly due to the Commitment of the partners and the ability to show them previously how USER will help
them to boost their local challenges.
=> At the end, selected cities are all in the target (except Pescara on poulation, but with a strong technical capacity).
Our focus needed to ensure that all Cities were able to organise learning and exchanges on the basis of a current
experimentation which could be comparable. We asked them to choose urban regeneration issues they wish to tackle during
the next 2 years (2013-14), located on a physical neignhbourhood and with a specific focus on 1 or 2 location(s) / thematic(s)
where "public Space" could show concrete results.
=> USER will not be the core of each urban regeneration project, but an added value to improve its conception /
implementation.
Meeting organised during Development Phase (Site visits & Seminars) help to agree on a more precise focus shared by
everybody on Pilot Sites connected with local challenges allowing an experimentation and being able to boost local policies.
We have also discussed with Cities to ensure their commitment to implement a common methodological frame and calendar to
learn and produce knowledge together. Discussions led all Cities to accept to propose an experimentation during the 2 next
years and to share the results.
5. (II.5) EAP recommendations
URBACT II
Page 14 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
The EAP gave several recommendations. The main ones to take in consideration are the following :
Crit 1- Relevance of proposal and European value added : "the partners should seriously work in finding a more specific focus
to the project which is totally shared by all partners".
- Decision to precise the focus around the concept of "conflicts and changes on public spaces" which make more concrete the
topic and gives operational objectives to partners. The sub-themes (friendly, safety and efficiency) give now a clear direction
for exchanges and a stronger coherence of partnership.
- Decision to deepen the local situation of partners to ensure they share the topic and they already understand the challenges
they will have to tackle at local level.
Crit 2- Coherence of proposal :"high level of participation and commitment is expected of all partners and other participants
working in the ULSG".
- Decisions to propose to partners to develop, within the frame of the project, a local experimentation fed by methodological
tools to partners (CSTB involvement as external expertise and "USER methodological handbook" will be part of it - see WP2
& VIII.2 on FAF).
- During site visits, LP and LE have worked to ensure with each partner the focus to analyse local conditions of involvement to
produce knowledge on transnational exchange.
- USER will give them local support to implement concretly a project (workshops, toolbox) to improve practices and
strenghthen their commitment.
Crit 3 - Quality of expected results : "The expected impact of the project on the policies and future actions of the partners is
shown to a certain degree; more elaboration would have been an asset / local stakeholders, are key players in the action and are
expected to participate actively and with considerable commitment / The lead partner and other external expertise will spend
considerable time and effort in guiding the work of the ULSG".
- Connection with a local experimentation is a way to ensure the commitment of partners. They will have opportunity to apply
knowledge / to share learnings during the network duration,
- Involvement of CSTB is an answer to ensure the capacity to guide the work of partners at local level and to produce
knowledge able to be disseminate at European level.
- Each partner will also work with local stakeholders in capacity to disseminate knowledge at local level (universities,
networks of professionnals, ...).
Concluding remarks : "the partners should seriously work during the development phase to guarantee that all local experiences
are explained to become transferable to other cities (within and outside the network)".
- By focusing on Public Space, the topic is more understandable by cities. It is a way to ensure transferability. Meantime,
diversity of partner's situations is a way to ensure that the USER approach would be transferable in different contexts.
- Strong empowerment of partners on their duty to contribute to exchanges from their local practices.
- Strong thematic focus on concrete and mutualised objects allow exchange wathever the urban context and the cultural
background of partners.
In conclusion, our approach has been modify by EAP recommendations in the way that it helps us to precise the focus and to
ensure the capacity of Cities involved in USER to commit on objectives of the project and ways to reach them.
URBACT II
Page 15 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- III - (III) WORK PACKAGE 1 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT
1. (III.1) Lead partner management team
EXPERIENCE OF GRENOBLE ALPES METROPOLE IN TRANSNATIONAL EXCHANGES :
Grenoble Alpes Metropole has been involved as partner in several URBACT networks during the first generation of URBACT
programmes (2004-2006) :
- PARTECIPANDO on citizen participation,
- ECO-FI-NET on tools for economic development in deprived neighbourhoods.
Grenoble Alpes Metropole is currently participating in 2 ULSGs led by Municipalities located in the metropolitan area and
member of Grenoble Alpes Metropole :
- CASH network on energy efficiency in social housing led by the City of Echirolles,
- Urban N.O.S.E on social economy led by the City of Grenoble.
Grenoble Alpes Metropole is a current member of a new Alpine Space project called RURBANCE focused on urban-rural
functional relationships in the alpine metropolis context.
Grenoble Alpes Metropole was also partner of 2 European cooperation projects:
- Concerto 2005-2010 on energy efficency,
- IEE - Presto project 2010-2012 on bicycle development in the Cities as a soft transport mode.
Apart from cooperation programmes, Grenoble Alpes Metropole is takes actively part in Eurocities' network :
- vice-charing "mobility forum" from 2006 to 2010,
- participating in "Social affairs Forum - SAF"
- organising SAF meeting (May 2011 - 80 participants) on social innovation.
Following these experiences, we consider to be able to lead a European Network as a next step in our European involvement.
EXPERIENCE OF USER LEAD PARTNER PROJECT STAFF :
For the transnational coordination & management of the USER Network, Grenoble Alpes Metropole proposes a team of three
operating staff members (declaring staff costs) :
- Claire PREDAL, in charge of the overall project coordination : recruted specifically to manage USER, she is experienced in
coordinating and managing, as partner, an URBACT Project (CASH for Rhône-Alpes Region). She has also managed for the
Rhône-Alpes Region the Urban Integrated Approach of Structural Funds (ERDF - ESF) in 2007-2013. She speaks/writes
English.
- Elodie CASTELLO, in charge of the administrative & financial coordination : experience in managing structural funds
(URBAN 2001-06 as managing authority, structural funds in 2007-13 as lead partner of an integrated urban project) and
managing, as a partner, a European exchange project of Intelligent Energy Europe (2010-2012). She speaks/writes English and
Spanish.
- Valérie GUERIN, in charge of communication : communication officer at Grenoble Alpes Metropole in charge of several
URBACT II
Page 16 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Communication Projects. She has a background of international work by an experience in Canada. She speaks/writes English.
Also, Eruic RUIZ, as head of the "Territorial and Social cohesion department (which hosts the USER project within the
Grenoble Alpes Metropole organisational chart) will supervize the project - both in its transnational & local dimension. He is
an expert on urban and social territorial cohesion and has a long experience working as architect / urbanist in Brasil & Mayotte
Island. He speaks/write English, Spanish and Portuguese (not declaring staff costs).
2. (III.2) Activities to be implemented under work package 1
1. SETTING GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK WITH THE URBACT SECRETARIATE :
* Establish a complete formal framework with the URBACT secretariat for implementation phase :
Official documents are to be produced at the beginning of implementation phase :
- a new subsidy contract specific to phase 2 ;
- the joint convention defining the legal, moral and budgetary agreements between the lead partner and the partners. The
standard model will be adapted by the lead partner as the 'Charter of Commitment' of the USER project ;
- a new expertise request form to state the expectations of partners regarding expert participation to the network at
implementation phase ;
- Letters of approval of first level controllers for the new partner cities having a decentralized national system (initial partners
already in phase 1 : only in case of change).
- Audit trail documents for the new partners (initial partners already in phase 1 : only in case of change).
2. ORGANIZING MANAGEMENT & COORDINATION WITH PARTNERS :
* Hold regular meetings to ensure continual coordination between partners concerning project administrative & financial
management : Management work sessions will punctuate the 27 months life cycle of the USER project as it is being rolled-out
according to WP2. The transnational meetings used for this purpose will be : seminar 1 (Copenhagen) , seminar 3 (Lisbon) ,
seminar 4 (Krakow) , seminar 6 (Grenoble). Each time, the lead partner will remind requirements as to partner expenditures,
trace back the already achieved administrative milestones, announce the next ones (mainly the 6 monthy progress reports) with
a 'to do list' on a precise timeline. It will also be the opportunity to assess the quality of partner administrative coordination and
to propose improvements if judged necessary. These sessions cannot officially deal with particular situations of such or such a
partner, which shall always be dealt with seperately (during the venue and/or before and/or after).
* Make available facilitating tools to smoothen project management with partners : a dedicated USER project LP e-mail
address , management file-sharing platform.
3. IMPLEMENTING ADMINISTRATIVE & FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS :
URBACT II
Page 17 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
* 'Teach' or remind partners of the main eligibility rules and adminisitrative procedures to be respected in connection with
local project spending.
* Distant follow-up of administrative & financial work : reminder of rules, of necessity to use Presage CTE to enter
expenditures and to have them certified by local FLC. A timeline will be set ahead for every reporting period.
* Manage the 6 monthly reporting and the final reporting, both from a content and a financial point of view : between
meetings, the lead partner has to collect the content to be compiled within the progress reports and final report due for the
Secretariat. The lead partner will keep records of all the input received by partners to this end (use of management file-sharing
platform).
Prior successful management organisation (regular meetings & efficient distant coodination) with respect to partners is crucial
for an overall project-scale delivery !
* Financial treatment of costs and ERDF redistribution :
Choice of a decentralized management system : the lead partner takes on its local costs (as partner) + the majority share of
transnational costs. Each partner spends and certifies its own costs, which include local costs + an agreed share of 'localized'
transnational costs (mainly by hosting a seminar meeting; or only payed by the lead partner - as each partner spends and
certifies their local costs). Anyhow, the lead partner remains responsible and should guarantee compliance with EU and
structural funds eligibility and accountability rules.
The lead partner will receive 100% of the ERDF and is responsible for transferring the correct amount of ERDF to project
partners.
Observation regarding the Management of the expertise resources :
Separate budgets support expert resources ; however the lead partner is responsible for guiding, checking and keeping track of
expert work to ensure due payment by the secretariat.
3. (III.3) Partners’ Involvement in work package delivery
Grenoble Alpes Metropole agglomeration community
Grenoble Alpes Metropole, as lead Partner :
The USER team (ensuring the general coordination of the project, its administrative & financial management as well as the
transnational communication & dissemination) will dedicate the time necessary to meet requirements. The project operating
manager (Claire PREDAL) will work full-time, while the other 2 members (Elodie CASTELLO & Valérie GUERIN) will
adapt time spent on USER according to phases coming up in the work progamme and to reporting periods for URBACT.
URBACT II
Page 18 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
This involvement is also under the form of providing the following coordination & management facilitating tools :
- a management file sharing platform : to centralize main URBACT documents & main formalized productions of the
projects, including communication material : for consultation and dowloading purposes ; the place for partners to put their
material to feed progress reports.
- a dedicated USER e-mail address to be used by partners : to 'isolate' USER project exchanges between LP and its partners
from any other business.
City of Malaga
As seen in the final meeting of development phase with all present partners (initial + new ones - except Krakow) :
The project partner City of Malaga commits to answering to general and/or individualized requests from the LP so as to
contribute to the needed input for project compiling purposes.
To this end, the partner commits to assigning a project coordinator (assisted or not on specific dimensions - especially
financial) in order to meet these needs for the smooth management of the project.
City of Pescara
As seen in the final meeting of development phase with all present partners (initial + new ones - except Krakow) :
The project partner City of Pescara commits to answering in due time to general and/or individualized requests from the LP so
as to contribute to the needed input for project compiling purposes.
To this end, the partner commits to assigning a project coordinator (assisted or not on specific dimensions - especially
financial) in order to meet these needs for the smooth management of the project.
City of Lublin
As seen in the final meeting of development phase with all present partners (initial + new ones - except Krakow) :
The project partner City of Lublin commits to answering in due time to general and/or individualized requests from the LP so
as to contribute to the needed input for project compiling purposes.
To this end, the partner commits to assigning a project coordinator (assisted or not on specific dimensions - especially
financial) in order to meet these needs for the smooth management of the project.
City of Krakow
As discussed during preparatory contacts with the new partner, the city of Krakow :
The project partner City of Lublin commits to answering in due time to general and/or individualized requests from the LP so
as to contribute to the needed input for project compiling purposes.
To this end, the partner commits to assigning a project coordinator (assisted or not on specific dimensions - especially
URBACT II
Page 19 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
financial) in order to meet these needs for the smooth management of the project.
City of Dresden
As seen in the final meeting of development phase with all present partners (initial + new ones - except Krakow) :
The project partner City of Dresden commits to answering in due time to general and/or individualized requests from the LP so
as to contribute to the needed input for project compiling purposes.
To this end, the partner commits to assigning a project coordinator (assisted or not on specific dimensions - especially
financial) in order to meet these needs for the smooth management of the project.
City of Copenhagen
As seen in the final meeting of development phase with all present partners (initial + new ones - except Krakow) :
The project partner City of Copenhagen commits to answering in due time to general and/or individualized requests from the
LP so as to contribute to the needed input for project compiling purposes.
To this end, the partner commits to assigning a project coordinator (assisted or not on specific dimensions - especially
financial) in order to meet these needs for the smooth management of the project.
Lisbon Municipality
As seen in the final meeting of development phase with all present partners (initial + new ones - except Krakow) :
The project partner City of Lisbon commits to answering in due time to general and/or individualized requests from the LP so
as to contribute to the needed input for project compiling purposes.
To this end, the partner commits to assigning a project coordinator (assisted or not on specific dimensions - especially
financial) in order to meet these needs for the smooth management of the project.
City of Riga
As seen in the final meeting of development phase with all present partners (initial + new ones - except Krakow) :
The project partner City of Riga commits to answering in due time to general and/or individualized requests from the LP so as
to contribute to the needed input for project compiling purposes.
To this end, the partner commits to assigning a project coordinator (assisted or not on specific dimensions - especially
financial) in order to meet these needs for the smooth management of the project.
4. (III.4) List of expected deliverables under work package 1
URBACT II
Page 20 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Product
Quantity
Delivery date
1
subsidy contract
1
March 2013
2
joint convention / USER Charter of
commitment
1
March 2013
3
Letters of approval of First Level
Controllers
1
March 2013
4
1st progress report
1
August 2013
5
2nd progress report
1
March 2014
6
3rd progress report
1
April 2014
7
4th progress report
1
october 2014
8
Final report
1
April 2015
9
1st certificate & statement of
expenditure
1
August 2013
10
2nd certificate & statement of
expenditure
1
March 2014
11
3rd certificate & statement of
expenditure
1
April 2014
12
4th certificate & statement of
expenditure
1
october 2014
13
Final certificate & statement of
expenditure
1
April 2015
14
Audit trail documents
1
March 2013
15
Management File-sharing platform
1
February 2013
16
USER management LP e-mail
account
1
February 2013
17
Cities certificates & statements of
expenditure
45
for every reporting period
18
management sessions
4
during 4 of the 6 seminars
Describe each deliverable listed in the table above
Subsidy contract :
it is the contractual document which links the Lead Partner to the Urbact programme. It gives the LP the overall responsibility
of the project.
Joint convention / USER Charter of commitment :
it is the contractual document which links the Lead Partner to the other partners of the project. It states the commitments and
requirements of all partners vis a vis the project. An annex per partner with each city budget will be signed by ach partner. The
LP adapts this document as the Charter of Comitment to highlight USER-specific expectations. Any specific commitment
taken by a partner as regards the transnational dimension of the project will be specified in the annexe (for eg hosting a
seminar or leading a workshop group).
URBACT II
Page 21 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Letters of approval of first level controllers :
FLC are compulsory to carry-out expenditure control of every partner (mainly coherent with the project, budget, eligibility and
national rules). For partners from Member States which have not pre-assigned a first level controler (decentralized system), the
partner needs to propose a First Level Controller of its choice by filling in a checklist (to test the profile), which it sends to a
national approbation body. If the person suits requirements, the national approbation body establishes a letter of approval
which is directly sent to the URBACT Secretariate.
Audit trail documents :
It is a sheet that each partner must fill and which contains answers to a series of standard questions regarding project
administrative and financial framework and organisation ; it is intended to check the general soudness of the features of
project management adopted at city level and also to facilitate potential controls.
New partners from phase 2 will have to provide their audit trail document in time for transmittal by LP to the Urbact
Secretariate before the end of March 2013. The initial partners of phase 1 already provided an audit trail document which is
sufficient, unless changes make a new audit trail document necessary.
Progress reports :
Every 6 months, the LP will provide (through Presage CTE) a progress report to explain and show where the project stands in
terms of work plan accomplishments and of production of corresponding deliverables.
Final report :
It is the report which will complete reporting at the end of the project and recompile + synthesize the material from previous
progress reports in order to give an overall information on effective project accomplishments throughout implementation
phase.
Certificates and statements of expenditure :
- From all 9 cities : all their local expenditures are to be entered & certified into Presage CTE with a view to the general
finacial reporting by LP.
- General : Every 6 months, together with the progress report , the LP will provide (through Presage CTE) the certificate and
statement of expenditure which is the 'financial translation' of activities carried out over the given period. It is a compilation of
expenditures from all cities (spent and controlled at local level). This is a component - with the progress report - of the
payment claim to claim ERDF.
Final certificate and statement of expenditure :
Same as the 6 monthy certificates, only it is to ask for the last ERDF funds of the project (and maybe also allows to summarize
all the project expenditures from the beginning).
Management File-sharing platform :
A management file sharing platform : to centralize main URBACT documents & formalized productions of the projects,
including communication material : for consultation and dowloading purposes ; the place for partners to put their material to
feed progress reports.
URBACT II
Page 22 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
USER management LP e-mail account :
To 'isolate' USER project exchanges between LP and its partners from any other business. Will faciliate exchnages between an
increased number of partners in implementation phase, generating many messages.
Management sessions :
During seminars 1,3,4 and 6 : an item on the seminar agenda wil be specifically dedicated to administrative and finacial issues
of the project, always with a powerpoint presentation.
URBACT II
Page 23 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- IV - (IV) WORK PACKAGE 2 – TRANSNATIONAL EXCHANGE AND
LEARNING
1. (IV.1) Organisation of the exchange and learning process
1 - STARTING SITUATION AFTER DEVELOPMENT PHASE.
- At the end of Development Phase, the work has already begun through the Site Visits, the writing of Baseline study and FAF
and exchanges during Final Meeting in Malaga. The Development Phase was an opportunity to share and agree on the process
with all partners.
- The way to understand and to address the 3 core dimensions (more user-friendly, interactive public spaces solving
dysfunctions and conflicts of uses / Safer public spaces in a friendlier city / Cleaner, better maintained and upgraded public
spaces in a more efficient city) are quite different among European member states due to governance issues (institutional
organization, powers and competences of cities and other public sector institutions are diverse), legal frameworks, ways to
deliver urban services, ways to involve inhabitants and how neighbourhoods are defined (conceptual definition, scale of
projects, …) but all cities have tot ackle with the same kind of issues.
- USER wants to experiment how this challenge can be faced and how local stakeholders and local authorities can carry out
pilot actions in this field and test new and innovative solutions.
- The development phase has allowed to check that all Cities will be able to be committed despite different policies and
backgrounds. For these reasons, it is appropriate to frame the process through a shared vision of goals and methods among all
partners. The clarification of the understanding and commitment is the starting point of the network.
- Producing collective knowledge is also a key issue for urban policies. Often, networks of cities who share a common space
during a short period of time are not able to really produce collective knowledge. USER wants to make effective the exchange
process to become a learning and production process creating new knowledge.
2. LINKING TRANSNATIONAL & LOCAL WORK
- USER wants to address the topic by developing a process at 2 levels : transnational and local which will feed each other
constantly. For that reason, Cities will develop during the period an experimentation on several Pilot Sites.
- A process in 3 steps is designed to involve actively cities: the first one must achieve a common knowledge and a shared
conceptual framework of the topic to give cities tools for implementing their LAP. In a second step, production of concrete
exchanges, learning processes, experimentations and capitalization of good practices will be organized through decentralized
workshops. At the end, a last step will ensure and communicate results of the work to targets audience, from local to european
level.
3. ORGANISATION OF THE WORKSHOP STEP :
Cities will be grouped by 3. Currently, the proposal is :
- Group 1 : Krakow, Lisbon and Grenoble - deprived areas with modern architecture and situated in peripherical location.
Issues linked to occupation of public spaces within the neighbourhood.
- Group 2 : Dresden, Copenhaguen and Pescara - issues on integration of sub-central neighbourhoods with internal
dysfunctions related to a lack of connexion with surrounding neighbourhoods.
- Group 3 : Riga, Malaga and Lublin - issues of central neighbourhoods (often heritage listed) where conflicts of occupation
occured with different kinds of uses and challenge to maintain residents within the area.
URBACT II
Page 24 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Workshops will propose to deepen analysis between small group of Cities, with capacity for them to decide to deepen a
specific question if needed.
4 - CAPITALIZATION AND PRODUCTION OF KNOWLEDGE.
- USER is focused not only on learning, exchanging and analyzing the current practices. It wants to generate conceptual and
practical knowledge as a fruit of experimentation by considering itself as a pilot research-action project.
- Rethinking the conceptual framework of urban planning regarding public spaces (ways that cities are conceived, need to
create new and virtuous interactions between urban conception and urban management and need of anticipating urban
changes) will have to take into account the strategies, projects and reflections of the partner cities. The project (through a
process of analysis, systematization and capitalization) aims to validate the previous assumptions through the diversity of
existing practices and pilot actions (involving a variety of actors through a practical and interactive experience).
- Likewise USER is going to take advantage of outside knowledge and good practices, to integrate them as inputs for the
production of new knowledge regarding public spaces issues:
* the pertinence of the assumption tested through the experimentation process will allow USER to propose new strategies to
conceive and manage public spaces in a renewed way.
* in parallel, comparison and local experimentation activities, under the lead expert coordination and with the collaboration of
different expertises (including CSTB) will perform a systematic and continuous process of capitalization.
- Capitalization will produce conceptual and methodological knowledge which will be the main findings to disseminate within
the URBACT community. It will produce also a grid of analysis to choose USER best practices to be presented to the
URBACT community.
- Creating and carrying out the systematization and capitalization process. A methodological framework will be created to
ensure progress in the production of new knowledge as a result of the network exchanges and learning process. It includes
mainly: collecting information and documentation, synthesis of contributions, debates and discussions during seminars and
workshops and the set up of a group of experts that is going to play the role of a laboratory, a sort of “research &
development” (R+D) department of the network. This laboratory will generate drafts and discussion papers during the network
life that are going to feed the final conceptual document “Conceiving and managing the city otherwise”. The lead expert is
going to coordinate this systematization and capitalization process with the support of the lead partner.
5 - TOOLS FOR THE NETWORK :
The process in 3 steps (learning - experimenting - consolidating) is a good way to ensure meantime production of knowledge
and dissemination at local level if it is linked with a strong methodological frame.
* CONCERNING LEARNING & CAPITALIZATION PROCESSES.
Five issues are going to be driven to facilitate and to carry out this process of effective learning:
a) creating a previous framework of ideas, perspectives, issues and common challenges that should bring coherence to the
exchange process = Baseline Study + 3 thematic seminars,
b) encouraging cities at an early stage, to be participative, critical, bold and innovative in the way they participate = Input in
FAF + 3 thematic seminars,
c) clarifying the methodological procedure of exchanging, clarifying and simplifying the tools to be used = adaptation of
"URBACT toolbox" + USER Web Plateform = "USER methodological Toolbox" (see below),
d) making strong connections between network level (thematic seminars, exchanges….) and local level = WorkShop process,
e) reinforcing LAPs role in the learning process and in the knowledge building = role of ULSG and local experimentations.
URBACT II
Page 25 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
=> This method aims to reinforce a common knowledge & a common conceptual frame as a basis for producing and making
ideas emerge from the cities. It allows to sharing in deep analysis and proposals during WS (with "peer review" an "perception
reports" as tools to link LAP with transnational exchanges).
*FOR A COLLABORATIVE WORK BETWEEN PARTNERS - Beyond this process, we will built collaborative tools under
the label of "USER Methodological Toolbox":
- Creation of an open source "Web Plateform" (tools 2.0 with the lead expert playing the role of “community developer”) to
ensure consolidation, capitalization and dissemination of exchanges developed during seminars and workshops to encourage
city partners to discuss and disseminate their local approaches,
- The "Methodological ToolBox" will integrate concrete methods coming from partners experience (bottom-up aproach) &
proposals from LE/CSTB (top-down approach to evaluate through practices),
- The platform will be a common space of USER to share in between the foreseen seminars and workshops and be a place to
introduce documents, photos and other information provided by the cities,
- Involvement of CSTB (French Public Research center, Dpt of urban sociology with a strong experience on neighbourhood
management) as external expertise to design and develop USER toolbox. The CSTB will help partners to analyse their local
experimentation and be able to capitalise and to feed the network (and beyond). The CSTB ensure scientific commitment on
deliverables.
- The Platform will be an open door of USER to other institutions, cities, other Urbact II Networks, etc.,
- Also, use as much as possible URBACT mini-site & Newsletter to ensure complementary information of partners during the
whole period of exchanges (see WP4) and to highlight productions of the Toolbox.
ROLE OF POLITICIANS :
- Politicians are the first decision-makers in all public policy, USER as promoter of new ways to address urban issues has to
involve them as soon as possible in the process and give them an active role,
- The first level of involvement will take place within each local experimentation (they will lead) which will play a role to
ensure understanding of the project,
- Through their participation at the ULSG, they will give input by validating methods and bringing them at transnational level,
- At the end of the network, we will work with them to produce policy recommendations.
2. (IV.2) Activities to be implemented under work package 2
USER is organised in 3 steps coinciding with 3 periods and 3 objectives in order to ensure a very good connexion between
transnational and local levels and to give to Cities the habit of working together in a progressive process.
As starting point of the process, each partner will present itself to others in detail by writing a methodological paper presenting
its Pilot Site, methods, partnership and goals it wants to reach within USER framework.
The aim of this stage is to ensure a common knowledge while activating all partners at transnational level.
STEP 1 "LEARNING" (Months 1 to 12) - Deepening the Thematic Focus:
3 thematic seminars: learning and exchange to share objectives, approaches and methodologies within the 3 core dimensions
of USER: (3 sub-themes based on the baseline study analysis) :
- Seminar 1 (Copenhagen - March 2013) : "more user-friendly and interactive social spaces to solve dysfunctions and conflicts
URBACT II
Page 26 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
of uses.
- Seminar 2 (Riga - July 2013) : Safer public spaces in a friendlier city - this seminar will be organised the same week as the
URBACT Summer University to facilitate participation of USER partners at the Summer University.
- Seminar 3 (Lisbon - January 2014) : cleaner and better maintened public spaces in a more efficient city.
Each seminar will last 2 days with a common agenda :
- Day 1 - Knowledge day (open conference) : presentations from host city, external experts intervention, presentation of case
studies, presentations from 3-4 cities selected to make contributions, exchanges and conclusions + Site Visit.
- Day 2 - Know-How Day : work on methodological tools built from feed-back on opportunities and difficulties of the Cities.
It will be the moment - built with the assistance of CSTB - to give practical ways to organise the future work of ULSG and to
validate good practices. Presentations, experimentations and exchanges around tools will be organised.
* The proposed transnational exchange process needs a clear organization between lead partner and lead expert. The 3
thematic seminars will be co-steered by lead partner and lead expert.
* They will be also a way to generate findings, face main challenges of the different sub-themes and produce first knowledge
linked with the « USER methodological toolbox ».
STEP 2 "PRODUCING" (Months 8 to 20) - exchanges on progress linked to local experimentations.
- USER will organize a closer work between 3 groups of 3 Cities with common issues and similar challenges to facilitate
comparisons and mutual learning. The choice of groups is made by lead partner and lead expert, considering potential
added-value between each local situation.
- Objective to reinforce LAPs definition and implementation in each city, discussion and learning coming from the LAPs
implementation processes, analysis and proposals - coaching the LAPs. The workshop will also be an opportunity to involve
members of the ULSG of the host cities to participate actively in the exchange process. The Workshops process allows the
host city to show, analyze and exchange around its own local policies and projects.
- To ensure the global coherence of the learning strategy among the 3 groups of cities, the lead expert will lead the whole
process. The workshop agenda will be organized to allow lead expert to participate in all the meetings.
- The lead expert will prepare the WS with the host City and lead the work with a common method / frame for all workshops,
on the basis of a position paper written previously (objectives of the meeting, goals of the different LAPs). Workshop Reports
will be sent to all partners. The lead partner will steer this process.
STEP 2 – ORGANISATION OF WORKSHOPS & GROUPS OF CITIES
- Following this structure, 3 series of 3 Workshops will be organised (total: 9 meetings of 2 days each one). They will follow
the "Methodological frame for local experimentations" presented in WP3 around the following calendar :
* WorkShop 1 (in 3 Cities tbd - October 2013)
* WorkShop 2 (in 3 Cities tbd - April 2014)
* WorkShop 3 (in 3 Cities tbd - November 2014)
- Groups will be composed to give a wide range of situations helping a capitalisation process helpful to provide lessons for
many European cities :
* Group 1 : Lublin, Malaga and Riga = central old areas with a heritage value,
* Group 2 : Grenoble, Lisbon and Krakow = peripherical mono-functionals areas build during the 70's-80's,
* Group 3 : Copenhagen, Dresden and Pescara = peri-central spaces with issues of opening and connexion with the City
=> 3 Cities (Lublin, Lisbon and Dresden or Pescara - tbc) will have the charge to lead the WS process for their group. They
URBACT II
Page 27 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
will assist LP/LE to ensure a right commitment of partners (agenda, deliverables, participation, ...).
- Each workshop will be organised around a common framework during 2 days with :
* Morning Day 1 - Field Visit : presentation of territory - "guided tour of uses"
* Afternoon Day 1 - Meeting with local stakeholders + LAP presentation & exchanges to share concrete aspects on USER
work in progress (use of training tools)
* Morning Day 2 - deepening together specific issues / Difficulties on USER topic.
* Afternoon Day 2 - Conclusion of the WorkShop :What have we understood ? What could partners suggest ? First feedback
(perception reports by hosted cities)
- WORKSHOPS are ways to strenghthen the LAPS. Activities to produce and share knowledge will be linked with the
implementation of local strategies / LAPs with :
* Integrating previous contributions of cities on LAPs elaboration progress,
* Peer review of the host City (by Lead expert & the 2 visitors Cities) to give an external feedback on practices, difficulties
and local specificities (part of the LAP coaching). A previous methodological framework is going to be produced by the lead
expert,
* exchange on LAP implementation : difficulties, improvements, feedback of practices.
=> It ismeantime a process of LAPs' peer review and exchanges between cities on methods aspects. The knowledge linked to
exchanges of local strategies will achieve concrete findings regarding the key challenges and new knowledge that will be
useful for all the involved cities.
STEP 3 "CONSOLIDATION" (Months 18 to 27) : producing and finalizing USER Findings.
3 seminars with the 9 Cities will be organised to consolidate the work done in Steps 1 & 2 and produce findings and
contributions at Europen level.
- Seminar 4 (July 2014 - Krakow) : 1st consolidation seminar (between WS2 and WS3) to discuss guidelines and first results
for the consolidation process. It will give the foundations of the final outputs. Management authorities will be invited to
oversee how findings could be integrated at regional level.
- Seminar 5 (February 2015 - Paris) 2nd consolidation seminar only with cities Project Teams (Project Officer and local
project expert) will be organized to deepen the findings and results achieved by the network. This seminar will work on
evaluation by measuring indicators on achievement and systematizations of first findings produced by the network. It will last
1 day 1/2. We plan to organise it in Paris to be able to involve strongly CSTB skills and to associate URBACT Secretariate
(input in terms of consolidation / dissemination).
- Final Seminar (April 2015 - Grenoble tbc) between all 9 cities to finalize common conceptual and methodological findings,
to validate best practices and to discuss outputs of LAPs to be presented at the Final Conference followed directly (day after)
by ...
- Final conference (April 2015 - Grenoble tbc) : presentation of results to a larger audience (involving private and NGO
stakeholders, public institutions, professional bodies, universities) - European level event.
=> At the end of the project, USER will have carried out 6 transnational seminars and 3 series of 3 transnational workshops +
Final Conference.
URBACT II
Page 28 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
3. (IV.3) Partners’ Involvement in work package delivery
Grenoble Alpes Metropole agglomeration community
As lead Partner, Grenoble Alpes Metropole will have to:
- organise all the process of seminars and worshops with the local oranisers,
- Give a clear calendar of integrating requirements,
- ensure with LE the design and the implementation of the "USER Methodological toolbox",
- ensure active participation of the LE.
- produce with LE the final deliverables for the all network.
As partner, Grenoble Alpes Metropole will have to:
- describe in depth the local situation and the Pilot Site experimentation they will implement, showing tools they plan to use,
practices they already implement in the field,
- participate actively in the 6 seminars and give input for the seminars,
- host a Workshop and participate actively to other workshops,
- feed the "USER Toolbox" with their own local practices and experimentations,
- give input to the mid-term and final deliverables insuring their commitment on the results.
Specifically, Grenoble Alpes Metropole will have to lead the "Seminars 5, 6 and the Final Conference" organisation : working
with LE to ensure the agenda and commitment of partners and deliverables
City of Malaga
To deliver WP2, Malaga will have to :
- describe in depth their local situation and the Pilot Site experimentation they will implement, showing tools they plan to use,
practices they already implement in the field,
- participate actively in the 6 seminars and give input for the seminars,
- host a Workshop and participate actively in other workshops,
- feed the "USER Toolbox" with their own local practices and experimentations,
- give their input to the mid-term and final deliverables insuring their commitment on the results.
City of Pescara
To deliver WP2, Pescara will have to :
- describe in depth their local situation and the Pilot Site experimentation they will implement, showing tools they plan to use,
practices they already implement on the field,
- participate actively in the 6 seminars and give input for the seminars,
- host a Workshop and participate actively in other workshops,
- feed the "USER Toolbox" with their own local practices and experimentations,
- give their input to the mid-term and final deliverables insuring their commitment on the results.
Specifically, the City of Pescara will have to lead the Workshop process for the Group 2 (tbc) : working with LP/LE to ensure
the agenda and commitment of partners and deliverables
URBACT II
Page 29 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
City of Lublin
To deliver the WP2, Lublin will have to :
- describe in depth their local situation and the Pilot Site experimentation they will implement, showing tools they plan to use,
practices they already implement in the field,
- participate actively in the 6 seminars and give input for the seminars,
- host a Workshop and participating actively in other workshops,
- feed the "USER Toolbox" with their own local practices and experimentations,
- give their input to the mid-term and final deliverables insuring their commitment on the results.
Specifically, the City of Lublin will have to lead the Workshop process for the Group 1 : working with LP/LE to ensure the
agenda and commitment of partners and deliverables
City of Krakow
To deliver the WP2, Krakow will have to :
- describe in depth their local situation and the Pilot Site experimentation they will implement, showing tools they plan to use,
practices they already implement on the field,
- participate actively in the 6 seminars and give input for the seminars,
- host a Workshop and participate actively in other workshops,
- feed the "USER Toolbox" with their own local practices and experimentations,
- give their input to the mid-term and final deliverables insuring their commitment on the results.
Specifically, the City of Krakow will have to lead the "Seminar 4" organisation : working with LP/LE to ensure the agenda and
commitment of partners and deliverables.
City of Dresden
To deliver the WP2, Dresden will have to :
- describe in depth their local situation and the Pilot Site experimentation they will implement, showing tools they plan to use,
practices they already implement in the field,
- participate actively in the 6 seminars and give input for the seminars,
- host a Workshop and participate actively in other workshops,
- feed the "USER Toolbox" with their own local practices and experimentations,
- give their input to the mid-term and final deliverables insuring their commitment on the results.
Specifically, the City of Dresden will have to lead the Workshop process for the Group 2 (tbc) : working with LP/LE to ensure
the agenda and commitment of partners and deliverables.
City of Copenhagen
To deliver the WP2, Copenhagen will have to :
- describe in depth their local situation and the Pilot Site experimentation they will implement, showing tools they plan to use,
practices they already implement in the field,
- participate actively in the 6 seminars and give input for the seminars,
URBACT II
Page 30 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- host a Workshop and participate actively in other workshops,
- feed the "USER Toolbox" with their own local practices and experimentations,
- give their input to the mid-term and final deliverables insuring their commitment on the results.
Specifically, the City of Copenhagen will have to lead the "Seminar 1" organisation : working with LP/LE to ensure the
agenda and commitment of partners and deliverables.
Lisbon Municipality
To deliver the WP2, Lisbon will have to :
- describe in depth its local situation and the Pilot Site experimentation they will implement, showing tools they plan to use,
practices they already implement in the field,
- participate actively in the 6 seminars and give input for the seminars,
- host a Workshop and participe actively in other workshops,
- feed the "USER Toolbox" with their own local practices and experimentations,
- give their input to the mid-term and final deliverables insuring their commitment on the results.
Specifically, the City of Lisbon will have to lead the "Seminar 3" organisation : working with LP/LE to ensure the agenda and
commitment of partners and deliverables.
City of Riga
To deliver the WP2, partners will have to :
- describe in depth their local situation and the Pilot Site experimentation they will implement, showing tools they plan to use,
practices they already implement in the field,
- participate actively in the 6 seminars and gie input for the seminars,
- host a Workshop and participate actively in other workshops,
- feed the "USER Toolbox" with their own local practices and experimentations,
- give their input to the mid-term and final deliverables insuring their commitment on the results.
Specifically, the City of Riga will have to lead the "Seminar 2" organisation : working with LP/LE to ensure the agenda and
commitment of partners and deliverables.
4. (IV.4) List of expected deliverables under work package 2
Product
Quantity
Delivery date
1
Position papers for Thematic Seminars 3
February, June and December 2013
2
Contributions of Cities
27
March, July 2013 and January 2014
3
Organisation of 3 thematic seminars
3
March 2013, July 2013, January 2014
URBACT II
Page 31 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
4
Thematic Seminars reports
3
April 2013, September 2013 and
February 2014
5
Catalogue of case studies
1
September 2013
6
Presentation of the WorkShop process 1
September 2013
7
Organisation of 9 Workshops
9
October 2013, April 2014, November
2014
8
WorkShops reports
9
Novembre 2013, May and December
2014
9
Perception Reports (by Cities)
18
Novembre 2013, May and December
2014
10
Final report of the WorkShop Phase
1
January 2015
11
organisation of 3 consolidation
seminars
3
July 2014, February 2015, April 2015
12
Methodological USER Toolbox
results
1
March 2015
13
Research Paper: “New ways to
1
conceive and manage public spaces in
European cities”
April 2015
14
A "Concrete method for
neighbourhood management
Handbook"
1
April 2015
15
USER Best Practices Handbook
1
April 2015
16
Organisation of Final Conference
1
April 2015
Describe each deliverable listed in the table above
Each step will be connected with specific deliverables.
STEP 1
- Position papers (elaborated by the lead expert) for each thematic seminar. These papers will include: state of the art
(developing several issues coming from the Baseline Study), objectives of the seminar, findings expected, and summary of the
challenges evoked by the city partners. Previously the lead partner will make an inquiry among the partners. The position
papers will be elaborated and distributed previously among the partners as a basic tool to better focus the seminars.
- Catalog of Case studies linked to the set of problems addressed by the network. These cases will be collected from outside
the network and will play the role of relevant references of designing and managing public spaces otherwise.
- Contributions of each City for thematic seminar (way to address the issue, state of local practices). These contributions will
be framed in a common format and structured to facilitate comparison and benchmarking.
- Organisation of the 3 thematic seminars
- 3 Thematic Seminars reports with selection of Cities contributions, conferences of experts, main findings and learning’s,
main conclusions.
STEP 2 :
- Presentation of the WorkShop process : methodological document precising the frame, objectives and tools for WorkShops.
URBACT II
Page 32 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- Organisation of the 9 workshops.
- Workshops reports: The reports will emphasize in the comparison, the common and the differential features, and the main
challenges that are being faced by the different cities through its LSG and the elaboration of the LAPs.
- "Perception Reports" a result of the peer reviews process. Cities reviewing other cities will be commited to write a short
report with their general and specific perceptions of what is taking place in the reviewed city. These sorts of 'journalistic
accounts' are going to be published and distributed among all the cities of USER and beyond. Perception reports are specific
outputs emerging from the learning and exchanging process. What make "perception reports" a specific output of USER is the
focus which will be to look at hosting City with impressionistic look = saying what surprised the visitor, what is different, …
Perception reports will be subjective view ont hte hosting city with goal to "brake the codes" of usual peer reviews.
- Final report on workshop phase. This report will include the main conclusions of the different workshops with a cross cutting
analysis among all the cities.
STEP 3 :
- Organisation of the 3 Consolidation seminars.
- Final report: synthesis of exchanges, findings and learnings coming from thematic seminars and workshops. The report will
include final recommendations linked with the issues of the network. It is foreseable that the final report will include a set of
guidelines to set up an integrated process of urban regeneration including designing-management-involving citizens, as a
comprehensive and innovative approach to achieve a more convivial, friendlier and better managed public spaces.
- Local Actions Plan of all 9 Cities members of USER Network.
FINAL OUTPUTS OF URBACT PROJECT :
- Final Conference : dissemination of the main results of USER in an european level Conference.
- methodological USER toolbox results : finalizing the results of the findings produced by the USER toolbox (collective
production fo the network)
- Research Paper: “New ways to conceive and manage public spaces in European cities”. This deliverable is the foreseen
output of the proposed systematization and capitalization process. The document is the result of conceptual reflections based
on initial hypotheses: the crisis of the traditional process of producing the city including its conception and its management.
The document will have a clear European orientation to become a reference of a new conceptualization of the process of
conceiving and managing urban public spaces to achieve sustainability.
- A "Concrete method for neighbourhood management Handbook"; as an operational version of research paper for
practitioners : what lessons learned ?
- “USER Best Practices Handbook” destinated to European practitioners: examples of best practices selected by the Cities
fortheir quality and repeatability by European Cities.
URBACT II
Page 33 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- V - (V) WORK PACKAGE 3 – IMPACT ON LOCAL POLICIES AND
PRACTICES
1. (V.1) General Framework of activities to be implemented under work package 3
• ROLE OF ULSG in the OVERALL PROCESS is firstly to ensure impact on local governance and urban policies, but also to
feed the transnational work by concrete inputs based on local driving forces. USER should list specific requirements for ULSG
and Local Action Plans:
- Objectives: to activate local stakeholders through a process linking local experimentation and exchanges between peers.
- Each ULSG will drive a clear work plan including elaboration of the LAP, procedure to follow and capitalization of local
policies. Members of the ULSG are committed to highlighting the strategic situation (strengths and weaknesses) of urban
regeneration processes at local level and to integrate conclusions as starting point for the LAP.
- The ULSG members should be aware that the aim of the group is to face several challenges that where identified at the
beginning (see partners profiles). These challenges are concerned with the obstacles and constraints of the current approach to
densign and manage public spaces.
- Local Action Plans (LAPs) : ULSG will (on the basis of a common framework provided by the lead expert) carry out a pilot
action as a practical test of implementation. Thematic orientation of this pilot test are the decision of each ULSG, but within
the frame of USER transnational network.
- The LAP should be a test or a laboratory dealing with a new way of understanding and designing the city (public spaces),
searching for new approaches and procedures to link design and management and linking these two issues with the
empowerment of users and residents as local actors that will fuel the whole process with its practical knowledge.
- Therefore the setting up of the partners LAPs will be previously framed through a conceptual and methodological common
guideline provided by USER.
- The LAPs elaboration in USER should be an interactive and dynamic process of experimentation, systematization and design
of proposals. Regarding diversity of situations, the implementation of different pilot actions in different fields of public spaces
will be possible. Cities, following the system's chain (designing / managing / empowering) will decide on which sub-themes
the LAP will be focused. The systematization and capitalization process enhanced by the members of the ULSG will constitute
the basis and inputs for the whole Local Action Plan.
- Agenda and animation: each ULSG will be co-leaded by the USER local project coordinator and one other actor belonging to
the local authority and concerned with urban policies. The frequency of ULSG meetings will be linked with transnational
seminars (At least 1 ULSG meeting before, 1 after ; and again 1 before and 1 after the next) to strengthen connection between
local and transnational levels – to be discussed by partners.
• ULSG ROADMAP : It is proposed that each ULSG have to work at local level through a common methodological frame:
1. Setting up ULSG: presentation of the network (issues, objectives, methods, role of ULSG, membership, commitment of
local stakeholders, ...).
2. Organizations and implementation of a short seminar for members of the ULSG. This training session will contribute to the
cohesion and the common understanding of the members of the ULSG.
3. Local diagnosis deepening the baseline study. This short diagnosis will be focused on the previous practices in different
fields of urban regeneration, as significant references to work on urban management and design.
4. Definition of a working programme for each ULSG.
URBACT II
Page 34 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
5. Defining, planning and launching the Local Action Plans.
6. Integrating main findings, ideas and learning emerged from the transnational exchanges in the ULSG
7. Hosting one Workshop for each Cities: presentation of city objectives, presentation of LAP in progress, peer review process
=> LAP assesment and “perception report”.
=> The objective is to produce the LAP with a common approach / road which has to "take into account the users" (see ULSG
comosition below).
• METHODOLOGY OF ULSG / LAPs definition - ITINERARY & PROCEDURE
- USER propose to the 9 partners to follow a common methodology in a circular process from Identification of a pilot site to
the capitalization of findings taking into account cross-cutting issues (partnership, adaptation of local organisations, expertises
of uses) The experimentation process will follow a common itinerary in all the city partners under the coordination of the Lead
Expert with 6 stages (see map on annex):
*1st step: Identifying problems, conflicts and dysfunctions in the uses of a specific public space already advanced through the
partner profile document and to be developed during the first month of the project.
*2nd step: Observing current uses (specifically conflictive uses). This observation is a dynamic and continuous process,
involving those users that are concerned with a specific issue. Users should be organized and their knowledge should be
enhanced through participative processes
*3rd step: Understanding the causes of dysfunctions, conflicts and evolutions of uses. It entails organizations of workshops,
drawing rapid diagnosis and rapports, ensuring good debate and exchange where all the stakeholders concerned with the issue
should be involved, users but also managers, designers and planners.
*4th step: Drawing and testing initial solutions to the identified problems and conflicts. The different solutions linked to
different themes, conflict and users, should entail different kind of measures and resources. They will deal with measures in
different dimensions: regulations, negotiations, lobbying, services restructuration, investments, new public services,
public-private agreements.
*5th step: Designing and planning the implementation process of identified solutions. It deals with the elaboration of the
Local Action Plan and its expected outputs. Indicators of outputs achievement should be clearly defined. The LAP should be
very practical including just those measures and proposals that where identified in the previous steps. It will be a roadmap to
implement the foreseen and designed solutions. Some of the LAP proposal can be implemented during the USER period,
others will need more time and resources. In any case, the LAP has to become the compass for each city partner on the USER
topic.
*6th step: Capitalisation of findings and learning’s. It deals with a systematization process shared by all the members of the
ULSG. It is important that as a result of this experimentation, a permanent process of preventing and managing urban changes
and dysfunctions is implemented and consolidated.
This 6 stages will be linked to the transnational learning process in term of agenda.
- LAPs are the commitment of each city to organise its work following these stages, to experiment USER approach "in vivo"
to feed the network. Cities, through Pilot Site experimentations, create a laboratory of "making the City of tomorrow through
public spaces".
=> To reach that objective, USER will adapt the URBACT ULSG toolkit" as guidelines to implement action at local level
(ULSG Handbook - draft ready for the end of Development Phase) and will organise exchanges of information through the
USER methodologic toolkit" (Open source platform - see WP2).
URBACT II
Page 35 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
• PRINCIPLES FOR ULSG COMPOSITION.
- The partnership is a crucial point of the success of LAPs. If possible, it will be better to link the ULSG with an existing group
of local stakeholders to avoid creation of ex-nihilo group. Working with existing groups has the advantage that previous links
are already built among local stakeholders. ULSG should be created as a key space or platform to experiment new partnership
(laboratories of “urban management and urban designing of public spaces”).
- Several questions has been asked to City to help them in composing their ULSG : What kind of resources do we need? Who
will lead? What link with current local policies?.
- A wide involvement of stakeholder should be targeted. Because USER will play a role in experimenting new ways of linking
design and management of public spaces taking uses into accoun. Therefore all those local stakeholders that are concerned
with these two dimensions shall be active members of the ULSG.
- ULSG could be composed of Departments of the local authority (Municipality Departments & urban designers), regional and
National public institutions, Civil Society Organizations, housing companies (public and private), private companies (when
implementing urban services), citizens (residents, users, neighbours…individuals or through NGO's) and academics
(university and researchers to ensure systematization and dissemination among the future practitioners), fieldworkers (from
local governments or private companies when implementing urban services though private companies) because the
added-value of USER need their participation.
- Political representatives will be involved at local level to ensure a political involvement within the process
- Partners can organise their work at 2 levels with a core ULSG (short membership, mainly formed by local authority members
- decision makers) and a broader ULSG (broad composition, with just a consultation function or more operational linjed to
case study). It is strongly recommanded to organise ULSG with this model to ensure link between decision-making process
and experimentation.
2. (V.2) URBACT Local Support Groups at partner level
Grenoble Alpes Metropole agglomeration community
• ULSG ORGANISATION :
- Considering the achievement of the main objectives, Grenoble Alpes metropole has decided to implement actions at
European level with the will to concentrate on a focus : role of inhabitants and users whithin the city and neighbourhood
management processes. The main idea is that the Sustainable City has to answer needs of people which are living and working
in a context where ways of life are diverse and constantly changing.
- The “House of inhabitants” follow the objective to capitalize on experience, to facilitate exchanges and learnings, to develop
new practices and facilitate partnerships with the aim to produce a common knowledge between elected representatives,
practitionners, and inhabitants for a better efficiency of urban management.
=> For these reasons, the ULSG will be composed from the “House of inhabitants” dynamics. The ULSG will be organised
with two levels :
* The "House of inhabitants" ULSG plateform to allow to gather a broader partnership (landlords, developers, communities,
elected officials and residents' NGOs) to consolidate and build on the findings of experiments developed on the two selected
neighborhoods for the LAP. It will also share experience and knowledge learned during the 2 years lenght of USER projct.
The ULSG will link with several training organisations (CNFPT or academics, Ecole de la rénovation urbaine).
* Two subgroups integrating operational stakeholders will be created for each case study. Leaded by Grenoble Alpes
URBACT II
Page 36 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Metropole and Municipalities in charge of the project, they will ensure linkages and consistency of USER project between the
two scales of local partnership. They will capitalize the work developed within the project to feed transnational work and
capitalization of knowledge production.
• COMPOSITION OF ULSG:
- ULSG co-leaded by Grenoble Alpes Metropole & House of Inhabitants – resource centre (Pont de Claix),
- Municipalities : Grenoble & Saint martin d'Hères (study cases), others depending the will,
Social Housing Companies (public and private),
- NGOs : representing inhabitants, social housing residents, private housing interests,
- Caisse des Dépôts, Ecole de la rénovation urbaine (tbc), CSTB, University,
- Others ...
City of Malaga
• Setting up ULSG composed by Wellbeing Department, Historic Centre District, OMAU- European Programme Service,
Social Services in centre District, Urban Planning Office, Environment Department, Security Department, Local Policy,
Culture & Tourism Department, Local Institute for Training & Employment,
Local Institute for Housing, Association of Patios Trinidad and Perchel, Association of Neighbours Trinidad-Centro,
Association Arrabal, Public School Bergamín, Health Care Public Center "Jesús el Cautivo", Civil Society and Technicians of
public services, professionals sand other socio-economic actors operating in the area.
The ULSG coordinator in Málaga will be D. Cristobal Gil, Director of Social Services in Historic District.
• Organisation of ULSG in Málaga:
- Steering Committee: leaded by the Municipal Board of Central Municipal District, Department of Social Rights and
European Programme Service. Political and decision making level. It would be advised and assisted by technical experts of the
Project Task Forces.
-Project Task Forces: LAP will determine the range of projects to be developed. Each project should organise a task force
made up of users reference the specific scope of the project in working areas: waste treatment; governance and inhabitants
participation, economic promotion, urban planning and social cohesion. A local technician and an expert in designing Local
Action Plans, will coordinate every thematic workshop.
- Assembly - wider group: Shall consist of the set of “users” that are part of ULSG. These meetings must report to all
participants of ULSG and monitor all process in the development of the LAP.
• Activities of ULSG in Málaga:
Project task force in 5 thematic areas, (meeting twice a year 2013-2014, once 2015). They will be responsible for
neighbourhood involvement and citizen participation as primary users of the area.
1 Steering Committee, (meeting once a year 2013-2015). It main purpose is the follow up the proposals and works of working
areas and make decisions about LAP.
1 Annual Assembly (2013-2015)- Final Assembly en 2015 will present LAP to citizens and media.
City of Pescara
The participation processes applied to the Green Spine project address to different and various actors. Some of these are
URBACT II
Page 37 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
present in every phases of the Local Action Plan, while other ones are interested only in a specific phase.
Therefore, we can imagine participatory forums organized at different levels but linked by some aspects: a Core LS, composed
by institutional authorities and the main decision makers; a Wider LSG, formed by different types of users; a Project Team
formed by experts who elaborate the project proposals.
It must be defined a project schedule, regarding phases and timetable, which will represent a precious tool to elaborate the
Local Action Plan respecting the overall GANTT of the USER Project.
The potential members of the participative organization chart are for the core LSG:
- Major of Pescara and S. Giovanni Teatino
- Council Members of Pescara and S. Giovanni Teatino
- Representative of the Region of Abruzzo
- Representative of the Provinces of Pescara and Chieti
- President of ANAS (National Autonomous Roads Corporation),
- President of Trenitalia (the primary train operator in Italy)
- President of GTM (company managing public transports in the metropolitan area of Pescara)
- Presidents of Asso Industria CH-PE
- President of the Chamber of Commerce
- University G. d’Annunzio
- Professional Associations
- President of the Airport of Abruzzo
- Comander of the Coast Guard
Wider LSG 1 Green Spine (in addition to the members of the Core LSG):
- Environmental organizations
- Sport and cultural associations
- Representatives of old people
- Representative of schools
- Citizens
- Religious Associations
- Green spine project team
- Technical offices in the Municipality
- Council Members of the Municipalities of Pescara and San Giovanni Teatino
City of Lublin
Lublin would like to invite the representatives of local non-governmental organizations, representatives of local politicians
chosen by citizens to District Board, representatives of crucial SMEs and cultural institutions. The small local support group
will meet with users at open meetings.
To solve problems identify above, we want to invite representatives of local politics chosen to district
boards of Old Town and Downtown. They are work close with citizens and know problems of citizens
living in the districts. They are representatives of citizens and have influence on implementation some initiatives and
investment planning and implementing such investment by public money.
URBACT II
Page 38 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
The group of NGOs should be represented by clusters of enterprises, cluster of restaurant, associations of students, Employers'
Union of Lublin, Space Culture Forum.
Lublin community should be represented by public officers work on: spatial planning (Spatial Planning
Department), regeneration (Department of Strategy and Investors Supporting), cultural heritage 21
preservation (in case of area of Old Town as a place define as Historical Monument), consultancy and communication with
citizens and social participation (President Department) and representatives of public enterprises such as: City Transport Board
as a supervisory institution of The Municipal Public Transport Company (is a commercial company owned by the municipality
of Lublin) [area of public transport], Municipal Property Management Board [area of maintenance of municipal buildings and
public facilities and administrative buildings].
As non-regular member of LSG we plan to invite on some meetings representatives of thematic institutions, associations and
office departments, in case of meeting topic.
The way of LSG working, is planned as a small board of LSG consist of maximum 5 members. To some thematic subgroups
we planned to invite up to 6 new members, regarding, that each representative of the strictly board of LSG will be a leader of
thematic subgroup.
The communication plan of LSG working concerned a minimum one meeting per month. The way of working of subgroups
will be decided personally by the leaders of each groups, and it will be depend on subject, members of subgroup, and preferred
ways of communication (directly bilateral meeting, e-mail communication, common meeting of whole members of subgroup).
The meaning of Lublin USER is connected to representatives of organisations which has influence on local development and
regeneration in general. USERs in Lublin are the representatives of institutions and organisation, which tasks and services
covers in the chosen subject of project.
Association “Forum for Revitalisation”, as a “second level” partner for USER declares to assist the project and to spread it’s
outcomes among Polish cities (according to given funding possibilities) through conferences, trainings, publications and
website. (Lublin is a member of “Forum”).
It gives the following composition :
1.1 Lublin City Office:
- Monika Kłos, Non-Investment Projects Department,
- Wojciech Wilk, Chancellary of the Mayor,
- Hubert Mącik, Cultural Heritage Preservation Office
- Elżbieta Matuszak, Municipal Planning Department,
- Michał Karapuda, Culture Department
- Daniel Grzeszczuk, Non-Investment Projects Department
- Ewa Kipta, Municipal Planning Department
- Joanna Kapica, Chancellary of the Mayor
- Joanna Szeląg, Chancellary of the Mayor
- Robert Żysko, Development Strategy and Investor Assistance Department
- Jacek Warda, Development Strategy and Investor Assistance Department
URBACT II
Page 39 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- Józef Wrona – Environment Protection Department
- Krzysztof Łątka, Department of Non-Investment Projects
2. Users :
- Ryszard Milewski, President of Local Council for District of Downtown (Śródmieście)
- Łukasz Bilik, Zarząd Nieruchomości Komunalnych – Board of Municipal Real-Estates
- Rafał Tarnawski, Zarząd Transportu Miejskiego, Board of Municipal Transporation
- Grzegorz Malec, Zarząd Transportu Miejskiego, Board of Municipal Transporation
- Jan Kamiński, Council of Culture of Space, Catholic University of Lublin
- Marcin Skrzypek, Council of Culture of Space, „Brama Grodzka – Teatr NN” Centre
3. Users (already invited or idntified
- Mr Krzysztof Niećko, President of the Lublin Development Forum
- Mr Krzysztof Gorczyca, Association for Nature and Man
- Mr Mirosław Augustyniak, President of Restaurateurs and Hoteliers Cluster
- Mrs. Paulina Wojdak-Działa – Director of the Office of the Lublin's Union of Private
- Employers "Lewiatan"
- Mr Łukasik Adam Krzysztof, President of Townhouses Owners Association in Lublin
- Mr Marcin Pukas - President of Local Council for District of the Old Town (Stare Miasto)
- Mr Marek Jakubowski, Chairman of the Urban Development and Environmental Protection Committee at the City Council
- H. Ch. Andersen Theatre (located at the Old Town representatives
- The Dominican Order (located at the Old Town) representatives
Coordinator of the LSG – will be selected democratically by the members of the group at the next meeting in December 2012.
City of Krakow
Participants of the ULSG in Krakow will eb the following (tbc):
- 2 leaders of local communities (representatives of the residents, acting actively in the statutory bodies of housing
cooperatives, housing associations, social organisations active within the housing estate area, etc.)
- 2-3 representatives of the owners and administrators of the real estate
- 2-3 representatives of the commercial entities acting within the housing estate area
- 3-4 representatives of the units and institutions of social infrastructure, such as nursery schools, schools, universities, welfare
homes, culture homes, sport organisations
- 1 councillor of the City Council of Kraków
- 2 councillors of the District Councils
- 3 representatives of the selected departments of the Office for the City (Housing Department, Urban Planning Department,
Strategy and Development Department)
- 2-3 representatives of the selected urban units and private entities responsible for the functioning of the municipal and
council infrastructure
- 1 representative of the Municipal Social Welfare Centre
- 1 expert: representative of professional organisations or associations (architects, urban planners, etc.) or from university
URBACT II
Page 40 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- representatives of the institutions responsible for safety (Police, Fire Services)
Thee persons coordinating the Works will be: Project Manager of the USER Project (Natalia Biernat) and thematic expert
(Leszek Jasinski)
In addition we are looking for an external expert: representative of professional organizations or associations (architects, urban
planners, etc.) or from university (Urban Planning or Architecture – Polytechnics) who will be responsible for thematic
preparation of meetings, coordinating the works, animating the meetings, collecting datas to prepare LAP and writing
(physically) LAP.
The meetings will be organized periodically, each time a concrete subject will be launched (at least 10 days before the meeting
to make a good preparation of the subject) to have a reach discussion concerning problems and finding solutions.
Krakow will also buy equipment (in USER budget) to implement work at local level.
City of Dresden
The composition of the ULSG is in process of being finalized.
While the municipality will coordinate the general achievements, two non-municipal coordinators are envisaged for the
interior functioning of the ULSG :
- Quartier Friedrichstadt (registered association) as the first coordinator
- Umweltzentrum Dresden / Environmental Centre (registered association) as the second coordinator
- Entwicklungsforum Dresden (registered association)
- Friedrichstadt Zentral e. V. (registered association)
- Mobile Arbeit Friedrichstadt Outlaw gGmbH (streetwork on behalf of the municipal youth welfare office)
- Florian Ehrler, landscape architect with freiraumentwicklung ehrler Garten- und Landschaftsarchitektur, experienced as
managing director of the former „Weisseritz Initiative“ (2004-2010)
- Dresden Technical University, Faculty of Environmental Studies, Geographical Institute, Section Economic & Social
Geography
- The main housing companies / associations: so far, we have identified a major housing cooperative and three large-scale
private dwellers, one of them being engaged in a somewhat controversial construction project which has recently started to fill
in a green area close to pre-existing residential buildings, another being the residential manager of former publicly-owned
buildings, the third one a developer of new-built townhouses
- tbc: Local Agenda 21 for Dresden (registered association)
- tbc: Schokostudio architects (engaged in community development)
The municipality will be represented by the City planning office (CPO) in the first place. The CPO will be invited to each
plenary session / working group meeting of the ULSG. The CPO will assure the participation of any municipal department
concerned by current topics.
The Saxonian Ministry of the Interior as Managing Authority for the implementation of European structural funds in the field
URBACT II
Page 41 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
of sustainable urban development will be kept informed about the USER working process, and invited to plenary sessions of
the ULSG and any ULSG workshop upon agreement.
Users – others than the aforementioned ULSG members - are those individuals or groups (residents, shopkeepers, commuters,
people belonging to various ages and social groups) who will have to be identified by the ULSG throughout the process in
order to participate in the debates and introduce their experience and proposals. They cannot be committed immediately, as
this would not comply with the city’s role. The ULSG will assume the collection of most various users‘ proposals and
statements by means of interviews, surveys, invitation to the ULSG meetings and other appropriate and empowering
measures, thus providing knowledge to observe and to anticipate urban changes.
City of Copenhagen
ULSG in Sundholm will be composed by:
- Coordinator of the ULSG – Sia Boesen (City of Copenhagen),
- the Vice chairman of the local council,
- the Integrated Urban Renewal steering committee,
- project leader for a unified development plan for Amager, the Technical Administration,
- the coordinator for social housing and regeneration in Amager, the Technical Administration,
- the head of the activity centre for the homeless, the Social Administration,
- a central coordinator of inclusion, the Social Administration,
- head of the day-care institution, the Children and Youth Administration
- a member of the board in the new housing establishment, NGO,
- head of the Factory for art and design, NGO,
- a member of the Urban Garden group, NGO,
- a member from the local Friends of Sundholm group, NGO,
- Organisation and activities of ULSG at partner level
The USLG coordinator will be connected to the secretariat of Integrated Urban renewal in the Sundholm District. Meetings
will be held in the ULSG every 3.rd month. Bilateral meetings are expected to be held whenever needed.
Workshops, seminars and festivals: Every half a year the ULSG will host a local workshop, seminar or festival to address the
issues raised in the daily work. The idea of these events is to assure common learning and knowledge is shared among stake
holders participating in or residing in the area.
Lisbon Municipality
Lisbon ULSG will be composed from the followink stakeholders :
- Municipality: BIP/ZIP office, Sectorial municipality bodies, Politic decision makers
- Local Authorities
- NGO’s
- Local Housing Associations
- Informal Community groups
- LNEC – National Engineering Laboratory
- IRHU – National Rehabilitation and Housing Institute
URBACT II
Page 42 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
When the project will begin, others local stakehlders, representing mainly Users will join the group.
City of Riga
USLG wil mainly consist of potential stakeholders and representatives of various interests of two main local users’ groups
(local residents and local SMEs businesses) :
- Responsible departments of the Riga City Council (City Development Department, Financial Department, Traffic
Department, Property Department, Housing and Environment Department, Riga City Building Construction Directorate, Riga
Tourism Development Bureau, Riga Municipal Police)
- State Inspection for Heritage Protection,
- Neighborhoods’ Non-Governmental Organizations and Associations (like “Vecrīgas biedrība” – association of residents and
small-scale businesses of Old Town),
- Latvian Trade Association (representing interests of retail businesses),
- The Association of Hotels and Restaurants of Latvia, Latvian Association of Architects and Latvian Association of Spatial
Planners
- ULSG Coordinator will organize all local level activities and information exchange between local stake holders, other
participants and institutions, as well as with relevant projects’ groups in Riga and/or in the rest of Latvia.
- It is planned to involve inhabitants of different groups of age and social circles as well as specific interest groups like ‘green
activists’, bicycle users’ association etc. One of the measures in the framework of HCR development could be the
establishment of multi-functional HCR information and education centre – one stop shop – where education, culture,
recreation and entertainment, practical and commercial consultations, digital HCR model, library with materials and
publications about HCR, electronic database with research works and data carried out during the implementation of HCR
development plans’documents could be accessible for all groups of city users.
- Municipality of Riga considers that mutual cooperation with the inhabitants of RHC territories would promote their
awareness about the arrangement of surroundings and preservation of the environment of culture and history. Thus, the wider
support groups will be formed to involve inhabitants in preservation of culturally historical environment.
- Responsible: Ms. Solvita Kalvīte, Head of Public Involvement Division, Board of Urban Develpoment, City Develoment
Department of Riga City Council
Riga will also buy equipment (in USER budget) to implement work at local level.
3. (V.3) Participation in transnational activities at network level
Each partner is requested to attend transnational seminars and workshops (2-3 participants for each partner included on travel
budget). Discussion (during Site Visit, Seminars of Development Phase, …) were made to define profiles of officers and
politicians which are able to be involve on transnational meeting: practitioner on urban policies, speak english, involved on
ULSG.
In order to reach the objectives and to deliver the actions and outputs expected, Partners will implement this work package
URBACT II
Page 43 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
through analysis and exchanges within the ULSG and, if needed, specific survey ordered to local experts.
ULSG and LAPs are at the core of URBACT networks in order to ensure the objective of dissemination within each network.
LAPs are the main output for Cities and meantime the basis of the operational knowledge for the network. The challenge for
USER is to create a real and strong link between transnational exchanges and local policies.
LINKS WITH THE WHOLE NETWORK:
- USER wants to effectively connect ULSG with transnational exchanges. The detection of good practices, lessons learnt and
shared knowledge emerging from the network level should feed the local actions plans and the LSG of each partner city.
Inversely, ULSG and LAPs should feed the transnational exchanges and learnings at network level. This is a key issue and a
crucial challenge for USER project: avoiding separation between the two levels.
- ULSG will be requested to contribute to transnational exchanges by showing their own practices, organising a seminar and a
WorkShop, by giving their input to the 3 seminars of the 1st Step. semaine
=> All partners inputs will feed the USER methodolical Toolbox to be describe, evaluate and validate by the trinomial
LP/LE/CSTB.
4. (V.4) Participation in national capacity-building scheme
Grenoble Alpes Metropole agglomeration community
Grenoble Alpes Metropole will propose the participation of the LSG coordinator, which is a binomial :
- Simon CAEN, project officer in charge of "Urban & Social Neighbourhood management" at Grenoble Alpes Metropole
- Perrine TAULEIGNE, project officer in charge of the House of Inhabitants,
- the third participant will come from NGO's appointed by residents.
Budget is estimate with the following costs :
- 1 travel per person + 1 night + 1 diner =(250 €*3 seminars )*3 persons = 2 250 €
City of Malaga
City of Malaga will propose the participation of :
- Cristobal Gil coordinator of Málaga’s Local Support Group ,
- Dolores Alcarazo, Social Services Technician in the Historic District on behalf,
- an expert in designing Local Actions Plans to be hired by the City Council.
We consider they are target audience of capacity scheme, because of their daily contact and work with population in the area,
playing a relevant role as link between citizenship and stakeholders. The expert (to choose) to be hired for designing Local
Action Plan, should be involved in the capacity-building scheme, in order to improve his/her expertise, and also because of the
interest to be part of exchange of know-how and good practices. The expert should have language skills in order to actively
take part in peer-reviews.
Budget is estimate with the following costs :
- 1 travel per person + 1 night + 1 diner =(250 €*3 seminars )*3 persons = 2 250 €
URBACT II
Page 44 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
City of Pescara
City of Pescara will propose the participation of :
- a representative from the Municipality of Pescara,
- a representative from the Municipality of San Giovanni Teatino,
- the LSG coordinator.
escara has chosen them because they are elected representatives and work on programming activities. Thanks to their support,
the Local Action Plan will surely be carried out in an effective way.
Budget is estimate with the following costs :
- 1 travel per person + 1 night + 1 diner =(250 €*3 seminars )*3 persons = 2 250 €
City of Lublin
City of Lublin will propose the participation of :
- Marek Jakubowski – chairman of City Development,
- Łukasz Bilik - Head of Exploitation Department at the Board of Municipal Real-Estates.
- Jan Kamiński - President of Council of Culture of Space (NGO)
- Marcin Skrzypek – an employee of"Grodzka Gate - NN Theatre" cultural centre, (NGO)
Budget is estimate with the following costs :
- 1 travel per person + 1 night + 1 diner =(150 €*3 seminars )*3 persons = 1350 €
City of Krakow
City of Krakow will propose the participation of :
- Natalia Biernat – Municipality of Krakow – project manager of the USER project,
- Jakub Kosek – head of the local councilor from Azory district - as the person elected by the inhabitants (representative of
local interests),
- third one to be choosen from the Regional Policy Department from the Marshall Office of Malopolskie Voivodeship.
Budget is estimate with the following costs :
- 1 travel per person + 1 night + 1 diner =(150 €*3 seminars )*3 persons = 1350 €
City of Dresden
City of Dresden will propose the participation of :
- One of two project officers from the municipality (e. g. Bruno Buls)
- ULSG-coordinator 1: Tom Umbreit from Quartier Friedrichstadt (registered association)
- ULSG-coordinator 2: Stefan Mertenskötter from Umweltzentrum Dresden / Environmental Centre (registered association)
Budget is estimate with the following costs :
- 1 travel per person + 1 night + 1 diner =(250 €* 3 seminars )*3 persons = 2 250 €
City of Copenhagen
URBACT II
Page 45 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
City of Copenhagen will propose the participation of :
- Sia Boesen, LSG coordinator, project manager, secretariat of Integrated Urban Renewal in Sundholm District Copenhagen
- Per Hansson, citizen of Sundholm district, Head of the steering committee of the Integrated Urban renewal in Sundholm
District, member of friends of Sundholm. Per Hansson has been chosen because of his great interest in the neighbourhood and
core role in defining and identifying networks and participants in the local area.
- June Baasch, representative of the social administration. Head of The Activity Centre for the Homeless at Sundholm. June
Baasch has been chosen due to her insight in the area and her connection to the many different disadvantaged groups at
Sundholm.
Because Copenhagen is the Capital City of a small size State, budget is estimate with the following costs :
- no travel, no night + 1 diner per person =(50 €*3 seminars )*3 persons = 450 €
Lisbon Municipality
Lisbon Municipality will propose the participation of :
- Project officer Miguel Brito,
- Local authority representative (tbd)
- NGO representative (tbd),
Because Lisbon is the Capital City of a small size State, Budget is estimate with the following costs :
- no travel, no night + 1 diner per person =(50 €*3 seminars )*3 persons = 450 €
City of Riga
City of Riga will choose between the following participants of the ULSG :
- Neighborhood’s Non-Governmental Organizations and Associations (like “Vecrīgas biedrība” which represents interests of
inhabitants and small businesses of Old Town area)
- Latvian Association of Architects, Section of Young Architects,
- Latvian Association of Spatial Planners (unites professional urban planners from municipalities and private practices)
- The Association of Hotels and Restaurants of Latvia (involved in implementation of USER as the association that unites
hotels, guest houses, motels and restaurants for a professional cooperation)
- LSG Coordinator.
Because Riga is the Capital City of a small size State, budget is estimate with the following costs :
- no travel, no night + 1 diner per person =(50 €*3 seminars )*3 persons = 450 €
5. (V.5) List of expected deliverables under work package 3
1
URBACT II
Product
Quantity
Delivery date
Partners presentations : state of the
Art of local practices
9
April 2013
Page 46 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
2
Reports of ULSG meetings 1st phase
9
February 2014
3
Mid-term review of local action plans 9
March 2014
4
Catalog of local "good practices"
9
December 2014
5
Final report of ULSG Meetings
9
February 2015
6
LAPs
9
April 2015
7
Final report of participation at
National Capacity Building Scheme
9
December 2014
Describe each deliverable listed in the table above.
Through this work, the project will deliver the following deliverables:
1- Presentation of the 9 Cities to introduce each partner to others based on project they will implement during the 2 years time
- State of the art of practices at local level to highlights how partners work on the field, what kind of methods they use and
what results / experience they could already bring to the network.
* Description of local experiences for Cities linked to USER Topic (successes and failures) in term of projects and
methodologies
* Deepening the baseline study, integrating experimentations, proposals and recommendation that take place during the work
program of USER, through the workshops and through the ULSG activities.
2 & 5- Reports of all the meetings of the ULSG with main conclusions and decisions (at the end of hte first phase and at the
end of the overall process).
3- Mid-term review of Local Action Plans
4- Catalog of local good practices carried out by the partner cities of USER, as a fruit of the reflection and cooperation within
the ULSG. The catalog will highlight all those practices that show the new ways to link conception, management, and
involvement of citizens.
6- Presentation of Local Action Plans at the end of the process which will include, as a basic table of content, the following
items:
* The context. Designing and managing the city. Issues, evolution and main challenges,
* Data base. Main features and trends,
* Background: previous projects, lessons learned conclusions,
* Stakeholder’s involvement. Who is who… Links among them, conflicts, coalitions, etc. Public sector, private sector, NGOs,
* Experimentations and pilot actions linking design management and citizen involvement.
* Main conclusions and challenges,
* Strategic goals of the LAP. Towards a new conception and a new management of the city
* Proposals and measures of the LAP,
* The LAP as a strategic framework to enhance and to implement new interventions of urban regeneration,
* A system of monitoring, following and evaluation the progress of the LAP.
7- Final report of participation at National Capacity Building Scheme to conclude the process by showing how Cities have
participated and what do this project bring to them for implementing the ULSG.
URBACT II
Page 47 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- VI - (VI) WORK PACKAGE 4 – COMMUNICATION AND DISSEMINATION
1. (VI.1) Communication Strategy
• COMMUNICATION STRATEGY:
Communication & dissemination are essential issues of all URBACT networks in general. Objectives of the communication
strategy of the USER projectwill be firstly to collect and manage effectively results / findings of the network and then to
promote them to different targets (locally, regionally, transnationally - see below target audience). To reach those aims, USER
will follow recommendations of "URBACT Communication toolkit" and propose specific tools or initiatives.
• TARGET AUDIENCE:
Considering the USER topic, targets should be institutions (from local to European level) and inhabitants (at local level to show
what Europe is doing for people and urban territories). Our communications strategy proposes specific tools according to our
communication targets:
- partners in each country (with National Dissemination Points) = practitioners who make and manage the City of today,
- networks of professionals = important target for dissemination,
- local politicians = decision-makers, especially for the involvement of Users,
- students (crucial point to have a good dissemination/communication on academic target - architecture, urbanism, political
studies, social studies) = to reach future practitioners of urban policies.
- medias
- general public (audience) = because citizens are central in USER process
• COMMUNICATION PRIORITIES:
According to URBACT requirements, the Communication will be addressed in 2 dimensions:
- organizing and managing the information flux within the network : it seems important to establish a work method between
partners who will gather information from each. Common tools will be created and managed by the Lead partner (article
writing by the partners dedicated to the mini website, creating newsletters, reports, etc., web platform to develop a database of
information and visual documents, ...).
- promoting the information and inputs produced by the network. The collected information will be distributed to selected
targets. Moreover, it is interesting to combine our thoughts with students involved in urban renewal. Indeed, all the partner
cities are student cities. Tools and specific actions will be implemented in this direction.
• WHO WE ARE ? USER communication strategy is based on a "Baseline argument" to present the project:
- USER is a partnership of 9 Cities working together to experiment new ways of conceiving and managing the City. USER
focuses on urban public spaces through to knowledge of Users of the city. By this, USER wants to participate on making the
"Sustainable City of tomorrow".
- Key messages: working together on the issue and discuss this topic, we want to convey to the public a strong message: your
city, your community is involved in a European program to reflect and build the city of tomorrow.
• WHAT DO WE AIM TO DO ?
Under USER, we want to facilitate the communication between the various partners, to know the progress of work of each and
URBACT II
Page 48 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
share the results, experiences. For this we propose to implement communication tools unifyed and synthetic.
• MAIN OBJECTIVES - As lead partner, our main objectives in communication are:
- Communicate a coherent picture of the project (especially thanks to the graphic identity),
- Provide visibility equal to each partner,
- Create accessible and synthetic tools,
- To live network, federating.
• APPLICATION OF GRAPHIC CHARTER :
- The graphic charter was presented to partners during the 2 meetings of the Development Phase. It is composed of USER logo
and its authorized applications. Partners must respect the Charter in all communication relating to USER.
- After checking possibility with URBACT Secretariate, we propose a declination of the logo for each partner,
- The graphic charter is presented in the annexes.
2. (VI.2) Activities to be implemented under work package 4
BASE OF USERS' COMMUNICATION STRATEGY
• 1 - PLARFORM for communication:
- Creation of a web platform to stock informations related to the project linked to information and dissemination,
- Collecting informations related to Cities agenda at local level,
- Collecting "news" from newspapers, radios or TV at local level,
- Collecting pictures and videos from partners,
- communication between partners (and beyond).
=> The Platform will be organised as a social network in order to itensify distribution of information and exchanges.
• 2 - COMMUNICATION KIT:
- Grenoble Alpes Metropole will create a Communication Kit for local communication to facilitate communication at local /
national level,
- Grenoble Alpes Metropole creates graphism of common communication tools flexible and easy to use, like :
* USER flyer in English (the translation of the flyer being borne by partners),
* Kit stationery (letterhead, envelopes, press kits),
* Goodies (notepads, pencils).
- The Communicatio Kit gives each partner the opportunity to communicate USER while respecting the identity of the project
and use it freely during each partner events (exhibitions, fairs, exhibitions, press conferences, etc.)..
- In addition, other tools (Rollouts, 40 x 60 Poster, Postcards with visual of each city) could be developed around a strong
visual to create and have intended to promote awareness of partners through USER.
• 3 - MEDIA COVERAGE:
- The lead partner is responsible for the dissemination of the international media and each partner maintains its own list of
URBACT II
Page 49 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
local press. Tools broadcast on local networks will be common and / or customized.
The lead partner will ensure to:
- make available to media releases and press kits on site USER
- collect newspaper articles / interventions in the press to call the press review
- Particular attention should be paid to the seminars and the Final Conference (production of press releases, press conference to
the Final Conference)
• 4 - NEWSLETTERS for Dissemination (9 issues in 27 months):
- The Newsletter is in English and each partner has to translate it on its own language for diffusion at local level,
- Frequency: the letter will punctuate each seminar or workshop. These are held every 3 months, it is suggested that a
newsletter each seminar is between 8-9 newsletters for the duration of the program.
- the LP will make 2 versions of the newsletter: version in English on .pdf + version on text format (.doc) for translation with
space for local information,
- Format of the Newsletter is a A4 paper with :
* 1 page 1/2 for transnational informations (network info, local examples, events, ...)
* 1/2 page with URBACT Programme informations (presentation of URBACT, USER project team, ...) - The same for all 9
newletters
* This 1/2 page become a local page on local version of the newsletter with informations adapted to local stakeholders that do
not involve the entire network,
- The newsletter will be written by a business writer specializing in issues of urban renovation (eg a journalist). The style
should be concise and precise. Headings will be repeated for better monitoring (news, return to the previous seminar, no
progress of each project and difficulties or issues, schedule). They will be "people oriented writing" = each one present a story
involving one City (9 partners, 9 newletters, 9 stories),
- Dissemination actions (predicting the distribution plan) should be provided by all partners. The newsletter will be sent by
mail to the networks of each partner USER, journalists targeted, as well as URBACT networks (Eurocities, etc.). It will also be
posted on the website and USER will be posted on the websites of each partner.
- Dissemination at the project level : USER is part of an issue reclassification of public space. It is therefore important to
create a mailing list in which will be listed:
* Institutions (eg departments, boards, councils, etc.).
* Specialized media (urbanism, architecture, public service, ect.)
* Providers and project partners
- Dissemination at the local level : each partner is responsible for disseminating its local version of the newsletter to its
partners, its elected officials, its media. To do this, it will recommend everyone to create a mailing list that will be used
throughout the project.
SPECIFIC EVENTS / PROJECTS USER WANTS TO IMPLEMENT - ADDED VALUE OF THE NETWORK
• 5- THE COMMON PUBLIC EVENT:
- The partnership agrees to produce together a common public event able to be organised in a decentralised way.
- The principle of this event is to provide a highlight to the general public in each partner city. The aim is to inform the public
that its city is involved in a European project, with other cities to build the city of tomorrow. It is a well known communication
URBACT II
Page 50 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
rather than information.
- The proposal carried by the lead partner revolves around three axes:
* an event that does not require logistics too heavy,
* an event that can be invested differently partners,
* a festive event.
- The partnership agree on Grenoble Alpes Metropole proposal of a VIDEO PROJECTION on aesthetic images representative
of each partner city.
- Inspired by the Festival of Lights in Lyon, the video is designed to be shown on suport like facades or big walls. It will be
conducted at night in each city.
- The Lead Partner is responsible for achieving the video and partners to provide support with local materials (graphics /
pictures / videos). The video must be made by the end of 2014 to allow partners to broadcast before April 2015.
- Advantages: Flexible usage event (video) therefore no expos, media / Each partner to the extent that it may wish the event
(public broadcasting in committee, on a website)
- Difficulties: Each partner will invest the project / A complementary budget may be dedicated to this operation / In addition to
budget implementation, there shall be a specific budget communication for local communication around the event (media
campaign, posters).
• 6 - THE CAMPUS PROJECT
- It was found that all partner cities USER hosted university campuses or schools.
- It was therefore proposed to partners at the Kick Off Meeting to build a project USER OFF. Students, future leaders and
future designers would be put in a position to think of the city of tomorrow without limitation or restraint.
- Students involved are not only planners and architects but also students in psychology, sociology, art students or crafts, etc..
- The principle of this collaboration would be to allow students to work on the same issues and the same pilot sites for
professionals involved in USER. They will be asked to talk about their notion of public space.
- To be recovered, the projects carried out by students will be a special presentation at the Final Conference .
- Objectives: Link professionals - students / Remove uses, open horizons / Networking students from different campuses /
schools based on student active channels (association, student house)
- Difficulties: Involve students and professors around the world / Unlock a specific budget / Devote time to this project / Bring
to life the project, maintain continuity knowing that students change every back
• 7 - THE TRAINING PROJECT:
- The Training project is the creation by each City of a prototype of "training" focus on students, practitionners or elected
representatives (choice of the City).
- It could be a specific lesson, a workshop process or something else helping stakeholders to introduce the issue of "users as
stake holders of the City of tomorrow" approach on their practices or knowledge.
- It has to be design progressively as soon as possible to be implemented either in 2013-14 or 2014-15 academic year.
3. (VI.3) Project webmastering
Valérie GUERIN, Communication Officer at Grenoble-Alpes Métropole, will be in charge of fulfilling and u-dating the
URBACT II
Page 51 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
project mini-site. Communication Officer of USER Network, she works on a daily basis with Web medias.
4. (VI.4) Partners’ Involvement in work package delivery
Grenoble Alpes Metropole agglomeration community
- Partners will be requested to inform the Lead Partner Communication Officer of their local agenda. They will be request to
address regularly documents (in English).
- Communication carried by the lead partner must provide communication tools unifying and synthetic. These tools are all
project partners.
The lead partner must ensure that:
- Communicate a coherent picture of the project (thanks to the graphic identity)
- Provide visibility equal to each partner
- Create accessible tools and synthetic
- To live network, federating
To date, the tools developed in this direction are:
- The creation of a logo and a graphic
- The online site USER via the URBACT website
The tools that the Lead Partner must achieve are:
- Communication Plan: It outlines activities and achievements in terms of communication Throughout The program USER.
- The Flyer: it is a common communication document written in English and each Stock That partner can use the framework
of icts in the USER program.
- A Video: Video is the central element of the public event. Each partner will be Invited to Disseminate, as he wishes, before
April 2015.
- The update minisite
- Newsletters: the newsletter will present the progress of the project so summarized and popularized.
As partner, Grenoble Alpes Metropole will have, like other partners to :
- Transmit Lead Partner information and news relating to their work USER (for updating the minisite particular)
- Translat Newsletters into the language of their country (if desired) and write text on their local - Translated Newsletters into
the language of their country and write text on their local information (to be included in the space provided for this purpose in
the Newletter)
- Provide for the dissemination of video communication on the diffusion
- Organize and implement their collaboration on "Campus project", "Training Project" and "Common Public Event".
City of Malaga
In the context of the communication partners USER shall:
- Transmit Lead Partner information and news relating to their work USER (for updating the minisite particular)
URBACT II
Page 52 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- Translated Newsletters into the language of their country and write text on their local information (to be included in the space
provided for this purpose in the Newletter)
- Provide for the dissemination of video communication on the diffusion
- Organize and implement their collaboration on "Campus project" "Training Project" and "Common Public Event".
City of Malaga propose several complementary initiatives :
- “Trinidad-Perchel” Local Action Plan printed in paper (50-100 copies) in Spanish. If required, it will be translated into
English (10-20 copies).
- Up-dating USER Urbact mini-site, with information and photos of Workshops, seminars, …
- Roll-up of the project to be exposed in all meetings, seminars, workshops, news conference…
- Promotion of key days and events like International Environment Day, European day… Those special events will be
animated by ULSG coordinator in target area, in the framework of 5 thematic areas.
City of Pescara
In the context of the communication partners USER shall:
- Transmit Lead Partner information and news relating to their work USER (for updating the minisite particular)
- Translated Newsletters into the language of their country and write text on their local information (to be included in the space
provided for this purpose in the Newletter)
- Provide for the dissemination of video communication on the diffusion
- Organize and implement their collaboration on "Campus project" "Training Project" and "Common Public Event".
City of Lublin
In the context of the communication partners USER shall:
- Transmit Lead Partner information and news relating to their work USER (for updating the minisite particular)
- Translated Newsletters into the language of their country and write text on their local information (to be included in the space
provided for this purpose in the Newletter)
- Provide for the dissemination of video communication on the diffusion
- Organize and implement their collaboration on "Campus project" "Training Project" and "Common Public Event".
City of Krakow
In the context of the communication partners USER shall:
- Transmit Lead Partner information and news relating to their work USER (for updating the minisite particular)
- Translated Newsletters into the language of their country and write text on their local information (to be included in the space
provided for this purpose in the Newletter)
- Provide for the dissemination of video communication on the diffusion
- Organize and implement their collaboration on "Campus project" "Training Project" and "Common Public Event".
City of Dresden
In the context of the communication partners USER shall:
- Transmit Lead Partner information and news relating to their work USER (for updating the minisite particular)
- Translated Newsletters into the language of their country and write text on their local information (to be included in the space
URBACT II
Page 53 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
provided for this purpose in the Newletter)
- Provide for the dissemination of video communication on the diffusion
- Organize and implement their collaboration on "Campus project" "Training Project" and "Common Public Event".
City of Copenhagen
In the context of the communication partners USER shall:
- Transmit Lead Partner information and news relating to their work USER (for updating the minisite particular)
- Translated Newsletters into the language of their country and write text on their local information (to be included in the space
provided for this purpose in the Newletter)
- Provide for the dissemination of video communication on the diffusion
- Organize and implement their collaboration on "Campus project" "Training Project" and "Common Public Event".
Lisbon Municipality
In the context of the communication partners USER shall:
- Transmit Lead Partner information and news relating to their work USER (for updating the minisite particular)
- Translated Newsletters into the language of their country and write text on their local information (to be included in the space
provided for this purpose in the Newletter)
- Provide for the dissemination of video communication on the diffusion
- Organize and implement their collaboration on "Campus project" "Training Project" and "Common Public Event".
City of Riga
In the context of the communication partners USER shall:
- Transmit Lead Partner information and news relating to their work USER (for updating the minisite particular)
- Translated Newsletters into the language of their country (if desired) and write text on their local - Translated Newsletters
into the language of their country and write text on their local information (to be included in the space provided for this
purpose in the Newletter)
- Provide for the dissemination of video communication on the diffusion
- Organize and implement their collaboration on "Campus project" "Training Project" and "Common Public Event".
5. (VI.5) List of expected deliverables under work package 4
Product
Quantity
Delivery date
1
Newsletter 1 (Seminar 1)
10
February 2013
2
Newsletter 2 (Seminar 2)
10
June 2013
3
Newsletter 3 (Work Shop 1)
10
September 2013
4
Newsletter 4 (Seminar 3)
10
December 2013
5
Newsletter 5 (Work Shop 2)
10
March 2014
6
Newsletter 6 (Seminar 4)
10
June 2014
URBACT II
Page 54 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
7
Newsletter 7 (Work Shop 3)
10
October 2014
8
Production of Video for COMMON
PUBLIC EVENT
1
November 2014
9
Newsletter 8 (Seminar 5)
10
January 2015
10
Newsletter 9 (Final Conférence)
10
March 2015
11
Campus Project Presentation
9
April 2015
12
Training project Presentation
9
March 2015
13
Broadcast of Video on Local Public
Events (Common piublic event)
9
Spring 2015
14
Creation and printing of USER
Communication Kit
1
March 2013
Describe each deliverable listed in the table above
• NEWSLETTERS 1 to 9: The Lead Partner Newsletter be drafted by one between each seminar or workshop. Joint
Newsletter (in English) should summarize what was discussed in the seminar and to the development of various projects. A
local version (in the language of the country) may be written by the partners.
• PRODUCTION OF VIDEO FOR PUBLIC COMMON EVENT: Video is the central element of the public event.
- Grenoble Alpes Metropole will produce a video, given to partners to broadcastit in a Local Event,
- Each partner will be invited to disseminate the Video,in at least one event, before April 2015.
• CAMPUS PROJECT Presentation:
- A project implemented by all 9 Cities at local level to ask students to participate to USER approach,
- Each City choose the kind of project they want to propose under a prescription book written by the LP,
- At the Final Conference, Campus project will be highlighted on a format to define.
• TRAINING PROJECT Presentation:
- Each 9 Cities are required to develop a prototype of training at local level.
- They will present results of their work at the last Meeting
• Broadcast of VIDEO on Local Events:
- Each artner is required to broadcast a video (created by the LP) in a local event,
- This presentation could be broadcast on an existing event (it is even strongly recommended),
- The presentation will take place during the first semester of 2015.
• Creation and printing of USER Communication Kit:
- Grenoble Alpes Metropole will create a communication Kit for local communication,
- The Communicatio Kit gives each partner the opportunity to communicate USER while respecting the identity of the project
and use it freely during each partner events (exhibitions, fairs, exhibitions, press conferences, etc.).
- The Communication kit could consist of communication:
* USER flyer in English (the translation of the flyer being done by partners)
URBACT II
Page 55 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
* Kit stationery (letterhead, envelopes, press kits)
* Goodies (notepads, pencils)
URBACT II
Page 56 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- VII - (VII) MANAGING AUTHORITIES OF OPERATIONAL PROGRAMMES
1. (VII.1) Cooperation with Managing Authorities of Operational programmes
(ERDF and ESF)
Grenoble Alpes Metropole agglomeration community
Préfecture de Région Rhône Alpes
Secrétariat Général aux Affaires Régionales (General Secretariate for Regional affairs)
Mission "Europe"
Contact person : Sophie BOUSSAC-LOAREC
The MA wants to follow USER to look how to produce innovative methods and new tools to practitioners of urban
regeneration. This topic is supported by the measure "neighbourhood regeneration" in the ROP ERDF 2007-2013. Tools and
new forms of governance developed by USER will also be interesting in the context of emerging CLLD dynamic on European
Policies for 2014-2020.
City of Malaga
• Associated Managing Authority: Dirección General de Fondos Europeos y Planificación, in Consejería de Economía,
Innovación, Ciencia y Empleo, Regional Government Andalucía. The responsible person is Patricia Eguilior Arranz
(Phone:+34 955065015, e-mail: feuropeos.ceice@juntadeandalucia.es). Contac person: Adolfina Martínez Guirado, Head of
Service of planning and public coordination) in the Regional Government Andalucía (Phone:+34 955064923, e-mail:
adolfina.martinez@juntadeandalucia.es).
• We would like them to be a part of ULSG, playing an active role in workshops regarding thematic area urban planning and
Annual Assemblies. We consider very important them to be involved in the project as owners of few plots with no uses, placed
in key areas within the site.
• At national level, the Managing Authority is Dirección General de Fondos Comunitarios, in Ministerio de Hacienda y
Administraciones Públicas. Contac person: Iñigo Enríquez Amibia (Phone: +34 915835234, e-mail:
IEnriquez@sepg.minhap.es).
• They are informed of the project, and they support it. But as Managing Authorities for all Spanish participation in URBACT
project, they cannot guarantee a formal support (or attendance) to all projects, so they assign this responsibility to Regional
Governments.
City of Pescara
REGIONE ABRUZZO
Direzione Affari della Presidenza - Servizio Attività Internazionali (Inernational Affairs Department)
Ufficio Attività Comunitarie ed Internazionali (Office of Communities and International Activities
Contact person: Antonio Sorgi & Vincenzo Calvisi
AS Associated Managing Authority, the Region Abruzzo wishes, by its support :
- ensure complementarity with other measures and in this way will determine the value added;
- ensure that the issues addressed by the project are relevant in order to provide information regarding City priorities, programs
URBACT II
Page 57 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
and initiatives on the theme of the plan action; this will ensure the integration of local action plan in the making of policies and
programs at regional level. This way we will get better governance, avoiding duplication and waste of resources.
- integration of action plan in the Structural Funds and local public policies.
- to consolidate partnerships between MA, transferring best practices and tools among the regions. That horizontal
collaboration between MA could represent added value for both the City and for the Managing Authorities.
City of Lublin
Management Authority:
Council of the Lubelskie Region
Marshall's Office of the Lubelskie Region
ul. Spokojna 4 - PL-20-074 Lublin
Marshall : Krzysztof, Hetman
Operational Programme 'Lubelskie'
The MA will be invited to all ULSG meetings including transnational ones and disseminations events. We will work together
on urban policies matters of relevance for both city of Lublin as the capital of the region and other cities of the region to be
included in a new financial perspective 2014-2020 and regional operationnal programme of the Lubelskie Voivodship.
The programming for 2014-20 along with the outlines of the EU Cohesion Policy is considered in Lublin and Lubelskie region
as critical for efficient and rational development in Eastern parts both of Poland and of the EU which have been displaying a
rather poor economic indicators. The willingness of co-operation between regional and city administration has been declared.
A MA's representative has been attending working meetings at the developpement phase
City of Krakow
Managing Authority:
Marshall Office of Malopolskie Voivodeship.
Department of Regional Policy, responsible for coordinating and monitoring the works linked with European funds and
preparing the region for the new programming period 2014-2020.
Director Jakub Szymanski, contact: + 48 - 12 29 90 700, e:mail: sekretariat.pr@umwm.pl
The MA will be fully involved in the implementation of the USER project. The person from the Regional Policy Department
will be the member of the ULSG. HE/she will actively participate in all the meetings and trasferr the information to his/her
department.
City of Dresden
- Responsibilities regarding several ERDF funding lines have been delegated from the Saxon State Ministry for Economic
Affairs, Labour and Transport, who assumes reponsibility as Managing Authority for the administration of the ERDF fund in
Saxony, to the Saxon State Ministry of the Interior, Wilhelm-Buck-Straße 4, 01097 Dresden.
Mr Weßling is in charge of the implementation of various ERDF funding programmes in Saxony
(christian.wessling@smi.sachsen.de, phone + 49 351 564 3543).
- Drafted text regarding a forthcoming letter of intent to be sumitted by the M.A.: “The Saxon State Ministry of the Interior
URBACT II
Page 58 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
welcomes the participation of the City of Dresden in the USER network (Urban Sustainable and Efficient Regeneration) in the
framework of URBACT II and is willing to provide any useful information related to this project.
- The executive officer who will participate in the findings of the Local Support Group and the setting up of the Local Action
Plan on behalf of the Managing Authority will be Mr Weßling Due to the available time budget, the Managing Authority will
probably not be able to ensure attendance at LSG meetings on a regular basis, but will do its best to be kept informed and
contribute to the LSG’s findings whenever possible.“
City of Copenhagen
Ministry of Housing, Urban and Rural Affairs is managing Authority of Denmark. The Copenhagen programme is connected
to Trine Tophøj Heinemann, from the section of analysis and international affairs.
Lisbon Municipality
- Lisbon will involve the relevant Management Authority, Ministery of urban Development DGDOTDU, in charge of
structural funds.
- They are already informed of the project abd will articipe at the steering of the project at local level.
City of Riga
State Regional Development Agency / Territorial Cooperation Project Control Department
Contact person : Mr. Maris Krastins, director
URBACT II
Page 59 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- VIII - (VIII) METHODOLOGY AND USE OF EXPERTISE
1. (VIII.1) Use of the expertise resources allocated by the Programme
The remaining days of URBACT expertise will be assigned to the Lead Expert, Fernando BARREIRO.
=> Remaining working days allocated by the programme (166 – 42 already used in the Development Phase) = 124 working
days.
The Lead expert plays a general role of technical coordination ensuring the coherence between network focus and the partner’s
pilot local actions. Likewise he has to ensure the learning, capitalisation and knowledge production process as a main output
of the network working process
These working days are going to be distributed among the following activities:
1. Coordination of the working programme with the Lead partner team along the network life.
2. Coordination with CSTB regarding methodological and conceptual issues.
3. Design and elaboration of the methodological tools regarding thematic seminars, workshops and local actions. Delivering
among partners and giving support for its implementation.
4. Upgrading ULSG-LAP Handbook. Support to city partners to implement their road-map at local level.
5. Coordination of the thematic seminars. Preparation of “Position Papers”, animating seminars and producing final rapports.
6. Coordination, participation and ensuring production of the 9 workshops grouping 3 cities each one.
7. Animating and following the virtual space (facebook, blog...)
8. Giving technical support to the partner cities when needed.
9. Designing, coordination and producing the case studies catalogue
10. Collecting information and production of the USER best practices handbook
11. Coordination of the Research Paper.
12. Coordination and elaboration of the Final Rapport of the Workshops phase.
13. Giving support to the Lead Partner in the Newsletter production.
14. Elaboration of the User toolbox
15. Elaboration of the Final Conference Rapport.
The LP doesn't plan to call an additional ad hoc expertise by another expert.
2. (VIII.2) Use of the external expertise on the project budget
• GRENOBLE ALPES METROPOLE:
A) Assistance on methodological aspects and deliverables of dissemination by CSTB (French Research Centre which has
developed skills on neighbourhood management through a research team specialised on "urban sociology") -external expertise
dedicated to the whole partnership.
The CSTB will have 4 main duties :
1- Analysis of ractices et methodologic needs of partners (in accordance with Lead Expert duties),
URBACT II
Page 60 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
2- Enrichment of caitalization process by trainings to help partners to acquire tools = interventions in the 3 first seminars with
3 days of capacity-buildings,
3- Support for the development of a Web plateform (as social network)to animate a collaborative work producing good
methodologies capitalisation.
4- Assistance for creation of training products (targeted to actual & future practitioners like professionals, politicians,
students, inhabitants) adaptated to different institutionnals contexts.
- The CSTB will integrate their participation on their official research programme to ensure a capcity
- This partnership aims to give added value to the all partnership
B) House of inhabitants support for capitalisation and dissemination at local level.
House of inhabitants will co-pilot Grenoble's ULSG and will organise capitalisation for the network.
• PESCARA:
- Delegation to an external body of the tasks of project, financial and administrative coordination.
- LAP / ULSG expertise.
- First Level Control.
• MALAGA:
- Delegation to a external body of the tasks of project, financial and administrative coordination.
- LAP / ULSG expertise.
• LUBLIN:
- Evaluation of local regeneration programme (revision – diagnosis of 4 years implementation, good and bad solutions –
mistakes; revision of goals, recommendation to local regeneration programme adjustment),
- LAP / ULSG expertise.
- USERS / interests analysis (stakeholders analysis by the problems),
- Preparation of variant scenarios for choosen 3 most important/problematic places.
• DRESDEN:
- Administrative tasks for co-organisation / coordination of the LSG, also considering that the LSG should be perceived as a
"semi-autonomous" entity, not fully governed by municipality
- Expertise of Technical University of Dresden, Institute for Economic & Social Geography to provide surveys, seminars &
students` involvement.
• RIGA:
- LAP/ULSG expertise
- Additional studies & hire of external staff assisting in organization of public polls/surveys through the
elaboration/implementation of LAP;
• LISBON:
- LAP / ULSG expertise.
URBACT II
Page 61 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
• KRAKOW:
- LAP / ULSG expertise.
• COPENHAGEN:
- First Level Control.
URBACT II
Page 62 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- IX - (IX) PROJECT WORK PLAN
1. (IX.1) Project work plan
Objective
URBACT II
Action
Start date
End date
Description
Localization
Main partner
Participating
partners
Products
Amount
Page 63 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Work package 1 Action 1 2013-02-01 2013-03-31 This aspect focuses
– Project
Setting the
on the role of the LP
management
general
with regards to the
administrative
Urbact Secretariate,
framework with
on behalf of the full
the URBACT
partnership. It deals
Secretariate
with setting up the
framework (at the
beginning of
implementation
phase ) :
> Setting up the
framework : by the
end of March 2013
. Subsidy contract
. Joint convention =
USER Charter of
Commitment
. Audit trail
documents (for new
partners & initial
partners in case of
changes)
. FLC letters of
approbation (for
partners w/ a
decentralized system
- initial ones too in
case of changes)
URBACT II
Submitted version
Grenoble Alpes
Metropole agglomeration
community
1 Subsidy contract - 10,494.00 €
1 Joint convention /
USER Charter of
commitment - 1
Audit trail
documents - 1
Letters of approval
of first level
controllers
Page 64 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Action 2 2013-02-01 2015-04-30 This aspect deals
Isère - presentation
Carrying out
with methods, tools
management and
and procedures the
coordination
LP applies with its
with partners
partners, in order to
then be in a position
to succeed in its task
vis a vis the
URBACT
Secretariat.
Without a smooth
management going
on with partners, the
overall reporting
objective could be
compromised. It is
therefore a key issue
as far as project
management is
concerned.
Grenoble Alpes
City of Malaga - City 1 Management
5,489.00 €
Metropole agglomeration of Pescara - City of File-sharing platform
community
Lublin - City of
- 1 USER
Krakow - City of
management LP
Dresden - City of
e-mail account - 4
Copenhagen - Lisbon Management
Municipality - City sessions
of Riga -
Mainly, this action
consists in :
- holding regular
management
sessions during
seminars (not during
all of them, but a
strategic selection
according to
project's life cycle),
- sending messages
by e-mail when
necessary, with
enough delay (+
phone calls when
easier)
- sharing files useful
as reporting input,
for cities
internally/locally,
for the LP towards
the URBACT
Secretariate.
URBACT II
Page 65 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Action 3 2013-02-01 2015-04-30 This activity consists Isère - no
Implementing
in :
administrative &
- informing partners
financial
on URBACT
requirements
administrative and
financial rules,
- having a distant
'follow-up' of
administrative &
financial work donr
by partners
(consulting Presage
CTE input is one
way to base
exchanges on),
- managing the 6
monthly reporting
and the final
reporting,
- dealing with
financial treatment
of costs and ERDF
corresponding
redistribution
Submitted version
Grenoble Alpes
no
Metropole agglomeration
community
1 1st General
93,014.00 €
Certificate and
statement of
expenditure - 1 2nd
General Certificate
and statement of
expenditure - 1 3rd
General Certificate
and statement of
expenditure - 1 4th
General Certificate
and statement of
expenditure - 1 Final
certificate &
statement of
expenditures - 45
Cities certificates &
statements of
expenditure - 1 1st
progress report - 1
2nd progress report 1 3rd progress report
- 1 4th progress
report - 1 Final
report
Sub total
URBACT II
108,997.00 €
Page 66 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Work package 2
– Transnational
exchange and
learning
URBACT II
Action 1 - Step 1 2013-02-01 2014-01-31 STEP 1
- LEARNING :
"LEARNING"
deepening the
(Months 1 to 12) thematic focus
Deepening the
Thematic Focus:
3 thematic seminars:
learning and
exchange to share
objectives and
methodologies
within the 3 core
dimensions of
USER: (3
sub-themes based on
the baseline study
analysis):
- Seminar 1
(Copenhagen March 2013): "more
convivial and
interactive social
spaces to solve
dysfunctions and
conflicts of uses
- Seminar 2 (RigaJuly 2013): Safer
public spaces in a
friendlier city - this
seminar will be
organise the same
week than URBACT
Summer University
to facilitate
participation of
USER partners at the
Summer University
- Seminar 3 (Lisbon
- January 2014):
cleaner and better
maintened public
spaces in a more
efficient city
Each seminar will
length 2 days with a
common agenda
Submitted version
Grenoble Alpes
City of Malaga - City 3 Position papers for 85,832.00 €
Metropole agglomeration of Pescara - City of thematic seminars - 1
community
Lublin - City of
Catalogue of case
Krakow - City of
studies - 27
Dresden - City of
Contributions of
Copenhagen - Lisbon Cities for thematic
Municipality - City seminars - 3
of Riga Thematic Seminars
reports - 3
Organisation of 3
thematic seminars
Page 67 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Action 2 - Step 2 2013-10-01 2014-11-30 STEP 2
no specific
Grenoble Alpes
City of Malaga - City 1 Presentation of the 114,442.00 €
- PRODUCING
"PRODUCING"
localization - all
Metropole agglomeration of Pescara - City of WorkShop process - Exchanges on
(Months 8 to 20) partners host events community
Lublin - City of
9 WorkShops reports
progress linked
exchanges on
Krakow - City of
- 18 Perception
to local
progress linked to
Dresden - City of
Reports (by Cities) experimentation
local
Copenhagen - Lisbon 1 Final report of the
s
experimentations:
Municipality - City WorkShop Phase - 9
- USER will
of Riga Organisation of 9
organize a closer
Workshops
work between 3
groups of 3 Cities
with common issues
and similar
challenges to
facilitate
comparisons and
mutual learning.
- Objective to
reinforce LAPs
definition and
implementation in
each city, discussion
and learning’s
coming from the
LAPs
implementation
processes, analysis
and proposals,
coaching the LAPs.
- 3 series of 3
Workshops will be
organised (9
meetings of 2 days
each one):
* Work-Shop 1 (in 3
Cities - Oct. 2013),
* Work-Shop 2 (in 3
Cities - April 2014),
* Work-Shop 3 (in 3
Cities - Nov 2014.
URBACT II
Page 68 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Action 3 - Step 3 2014-07-01 2015-04-30 STEP 3
No specific
"CONSOLIDATION localization
CONSOLIDAT
" (Months 18 to 27)
ION : producing
: producing and
and finalizing
finalizing USER
USER findings
Findings.
3 seminars with the 9
Cities will be
organised to
consolidate the work
done on Steps 1 & 2
and produce findings
and contributions at
Europen level:
- - Seminar 4 (July
2014 - Krakow) : 1st
consolidation
seminar (between
WS2 and WS3) to
discuss guidelines
and first results for
the consolidation
process
- Seminar 5
(February 2015 Paris) 2nd
consolidation
seminar with only
cities Project Teams
+ URBACT & CSTB
- Final Seminar
between all 9 cities
to finalize common
conceptual and
methodological
findings + FINAL
CONFERENCE
Submitted version
Grenoble Alpes
City of Malaga - City 1 Research Paper:
85,832.00 €
Metropole agglomeration of Pescara - City of “New ways to
community
Lublin - City of
conceive and
Krakow - City of
manage public
Dresden - City of
spaces in European
Copenhagen - Lisbon cities” - 1 A
Municipality - City "Concrete method
of Riga for neighbourhood
management
Handbook" - 1 USER
Best Practices
Handbook - 1
Methodological
USER Toolbox
results - 1 USER
FINAL
CONFERENCE - 3
Organisation of 3
consolidation
seminars - 1 FINAL
CONFERENCE
Sub total
URBACT II
286,106.00 €
Page 69 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Work package 3 Action 1 – Impact on
Launching
local policies
ULSG & LAP
and practices
URBACT II
2013-02-01 2014-03-31 The WP3 is divided
in 2 parts
corresponding to 2
stages of the
process.
- The first stage
corresponds to the
first year of work at
local level where
each partner has to
launch the ULSG
and to begin to
prepare the LAP,
- The first phase will
be linked with
several deliverables
ensuring that all
cities are in a
process of
experimentation and
capitalization.
Submitted version
Grenoble Alpes
Metropole agglomeration
community
9 Reports of ULSG 95,982.00 €
meetings 1st phase 9 Mid-term review
of Local Action
Plans - 9 Partners
presentation : state
of the art of local
practices
Page 70 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
URBACT II
Submitted version
Action 2 2014-04-01 2015-04-30 The WP3 is divided No specific
Finalizing and
in 2 parts
localization
presenting LAPs
corresponding to 2
stages of the
process.
- The second stage
corresponds to the
second year of work
at local level where
each partner has to
finalize the LAP and
to produce result of
the experimentation
on a pilot Site.
- The second phase
will be linked with
several deliverables
ensuring that all
cities gives the final
outputs of local side
of the Network.
Grenoble Alpes
City of Malaga - City 9 Catalog of local
94,942.00 €
Metropole agglomeration of Pescara - City of "good practices" - 9
community
Lublin - City of
Final report of ULSG
Krakow - City of
Meetings - 9 LAPs
Dresden - City of
Copenhagen - Lisbon
Municipality - City
of Riga -
Action 3 2013-02-01 2014-12-31 The National
No specific
Participation in
Capacity Building
localization
the National
Scheme is proposed
Capacity
by URBACT and is
Building
a compulsory
Scheme
activity for each
network partner.
The "Action 3" of
the Work Plan has
the objective to
ensure the
Participation iof
USER partners and
to give a feedback of
the added value of
this "training
scheme"
Grenoble Alpes
City of Malaga - City 9 Final report of
Metropole agglomeration of Pescara - City of participation at
community
Lublin - City of
National Capacity
Krakow - City of
Building Scheme
Dresden - City of
Copenhagen - Lisbon
Municipality - City
of Riga -
43,373.00 €
Page 71 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Sub total
Work package 4
–
Communication
and
dissemination
URBACT II
Action 1 2013-02-01 2015-04-30 This action cover
Isère Transnational
organisation and
Communication
implementation of
framework and
Communication
tools
Startegy by the Lead
Partner :
- Base of the USER
Communication
strategy :
1- Data Base
2- Communication
Kit
3- Media Coverage
4- Creation and
edition of
Newsletters
Specific events /
project giving added
value of USER
5- Common Public
Event (coordination
and production of
Final deliverables Video
6- Coordination of
Campus project
7- Coordination of
Training project
Grenoble Alpes
Metropole agglomeration
community
234,297.00 €
1 Newsletter 1 - 1
49,700.00 €
Newsletter 2 - 1
Newsletter 3 - 1
Newsletter 4 - 1
Newsletter 5 - 1
Newsletter 6 - 1
Newsletter 7 - 1
Newsletter 8 - 1
Newsletter 9 - 1
Producing the Video
for Public common
Event - 1 Creation of
USER
Communication KIT
Page 72 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Action 2 2013-02-01 2015-04-30 This action covers
No specific
Communication
local requirements localization
at partners level
for communication +
local extra initiatives
coming from Cities
URBACT II
Submitted version
Grenoble Alpes
City of Malaga - City 9 Newsletter 1 - 9
52,470.00 €
Metropole agglomeration of Pescara - City of Newsletter 2 - 9
community
Lublin - City of
Newsletter 3 - 9
Krakow - City of
Newsletter 4 - 9
Dresden - City of
Newsletter 5 - 9
Copenhagen - Lisbon Newsletter 6 - 9
Municipality - City Newsletter 7 - 9
of Riga Newsletter 8 - 9
Newsletter 9 - 9
Campus project
presentation - 9
Training Project
Presentation - 9
Broadcast of VIDEO
on Local Events
Sub total
102,170.00 €
Total
731,570.00 €
Page 73 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- X - (X) PROJECT DELIVERABLES SUMMARY
1. (X.1) Project deliverables summary
URBACT II
Product
Type
Value
Description
Position papers for thematic seminars
study
3
- State of the art preparing each thematic
seminar (from Baseline Study with
partners contributions),
- Summary of the challenges, objectives ,
findings expected.
- The position papers will be shared with
cities partners to better focus
- LP / LE
Catalogue of case studies
study
1
Document linked to the set of problems
addressed by the network. These cases will
be collected from outside the network and
will play the role of relevant references of
good practices relating to designing and
managing public spaces otherwise.
Contributions of Cities for thematic
seminars
document
27
Contributions of each City for thematic
seminar (way to address the issue, state of
local practices). These contributions will
be framed in a common format and
structured to facilitate comparison and
benchmarking
Thematic Seminars reports
thematic report
3
Thematic Seminars results with selection
of Cities contributions, presentations of
experts, main findings and learning’s and
main conclusions from each seminars
Presentation of the WorkShop process
document
1
methodological document precising the
frame, objectives and tools for
WorkShops.
Page 74 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
URBACT II
Submitted version
WorkShops reports
thematic report
9
The reports will emphasize in the
comparison, the common and the
differential features, and the main
challenges that are being faced by the
different cities through its LSG and the
elaboration of the LAPs
Perception Reports (by Cities)
report
18
"Perception Reports" a result of the peer
reviews process. Cities reviewing other
cities will be commited to write a short
report with their general and specific
perceptions on what is taking place in the
reviewed city
Final report of the WorkShop Phase
working group
1
This report will include the main
conclusions of the different workshops
with a cross cutting analysis among all the
cities
Research Paper: “New ways to conceive
and manage public spaces in European
cities”
dissemination action
1
This deliverable is the foreseen output of
the proposed systematization and
capitalization process. The document is the
result of conceptual reflections
A "Concrete method for neighbourhood
management Handbook"
dissemination action
1
An operational version of research paper
for practitioners : what lessons learned ?
USER Best Practices Handbook
good practice examples
1
Examples of best practices selected by the
Cities for their quality and repeatability
potential by European Cities
Partners presentation : state of the art of
local practices
study
9
Presentation of the 9 Cities to introduce
highlight on
- how each partner work on the field,
- what kind of methods they use,
- what results / experiences they could
already bring to the network,
- what they will implement during the 2
years time
Page 75 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
URBACT II
Submitted version
Reports of ULSG meetings 1st phase
local support group
9
Reports of all the meetings of the ULSG
with main conclusions and decisions (at the
end of hte first phase and at the end of the
overall process).
Mid-term review of Local Action Plans
local action plan
9
Presenting to each other at what stage they
are on the way to define their futur LAP
Catalog of local "good practices"
dissemination action
9
Catalog of local good practices carried out
by the partner cities of USER, as a fruit of
the reflection and cooperation within the
ULSG. The catalog will highlight all
practices that show the new ways to link
conception, management and involvement.
Final report of ULSG Meetings
local support group
9
Reports of all the meetings of the ULSG
with main conclusions and decisions at the
end of the overall process to conclude the
local involvement by a highlight of the
work done and the local results of the
project.
LAPs
local action plan
9
Presentation of Local Action Plans at the
end of the process :
- Strategic goals of the LAP. Towards a
new conception and a new management of
the city,
- Proposals and measures of the LAP,
- A system of monitoring, following and
evaluation.
Final report of participation at National
Capacity Building Scheme
partner
9
Final report of participation at National
Capacity Building Scheme to conclude the
process by showing how Cities have
participated and what do this project bring
to them for implementing the ULSG.
Page 76 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
URBACT II
Submitted version
Methodological USER Toolbox results
web site and
collaborative tools
1
Methodological USER toolbox results :
finalizing the results of the findings
produced by the USER toolbox (collective
production fo the network
USER FINAL CONFERENCE
meeting
1
Final Conference : dissemination of the
main results of USER in an european level
Conference.
Newsletter 1
newsletter
10
The Lead Partner Newsletter be drafted by
one between each seminar or workshop.
Joint Newsletter (in English) will
summarize topic of next seminar and the
development of various projects.
+ Local version in the language of each
partner
Newsletter 2
newsletter
10
The Lead Partner Newsletter be drafted by
one between each seminar or workshop.
Joint Newsletter (in English) should
summarize topic of the seminar and to the
development of various projects
+ A local version in the language of each
partner.
Newsletter 3
newsletter
10
The Lead Partner Newsletter be drafted by
one between each seminar or workshop.
Joint Newsletter (in English) should
summarize topic of the seminar and to the
development of various projects
+ A local version in the language of each
partner.
Page 77 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
URBACT II
Submitted version
Newsletter 4
newsletter
10
The Lead Partner Newsletter be drafted by
one between each seminar or workshop.
Joint Newsletter (in English) should
summarize topic of the seminar and to the
development of various projects
+ A local version in the language of each
partner.
Newsletter 5
newsletter
10
The Lead Partner Newsletter be drafted by
one between each seminar or workshop.
Joint Newsletter (in English) should
summarize topic of the seminar and to the
development of various projects
+ A local version in the language of each
partner.
Newsletter 6
newsletter
10
The Lead Partner Newsletter be drafted by
one between each seminar or workshop.
Joint Newsletter (in English) should
summarize topic of the seminar and to the
development of various projects
+ A local version in the language of each
partner.
Newsletter 7
newsletter
10
The Lead Partner Newsletter be drafted by
one between each seminar or workshop.
Joint Newsletter (in English) should
summarize topic of the seminar and to the
development of various projects
+ A local version in the language of each
partner.
Page 78 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
URBACT II
Submitted version
Newsletter 8
newsletter
10
The Lead Partner Newsletter be drafted by
one between each seminar or workshop.
Joint Newsletter (in English) should
summarize topic of the seminar and to the
development of various projects
+ A local version in the language of each
partner.
Newsletter 9
newsletter
10
The Lead Partner Newsletter be drafted by
one between each seminar or workshop.
Joint Newsletter (in English) should
summarize topic of the seminar and to the
development of various projects
+ A local version in the language of each
partner.
Producing the Video for Public common
Event
communication tools
1
VIDEO FOR PUBLIC COMMON
EVENT: Video is the central element of
the public event.
- Grenoble Alpes Metropole will produce a
video, given to partners to broadcastit in a
Local Event,
Campus project presentation
spin off projects
9
- Each 9 Cities are required to develop a
prototype of training at local level. They
will present results of their work at the last
Meeting
Training Project Presentation
spin off projects
9
- Each 9 Cities are required to develop a
prototype of training at local level. They
will present results of their work at the last
Meeting
Broadcast of VIDEO on Local Events
communication tools
9
Each will ahve to broadcast the Video
during a local event (or more) of their
choice. The objective is to present to
inhabitants USER
Page 79 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Creation of USER Communication KIT
communication tools
1
-The Communication kit could consist of
communication:
* USER flyer in English (the translation of
the flyer being borne by partners)
* Kit stationery (letterhead, envelopes,
press kits)
* Goodies (notepads, pencils)
Subsidy contract
partnership agreement
1
Subsidy contract :
it is the contractual document which links
the Lead Partner to the Urbact programme.
It gives the LP the overall responsibility of
the project.
Joint convention / USER Charter of
commitment
URBACT II
partnership agreement
1
it is the contractual document which links
the Lead Partner to the other partners of the
project. It states the commitments and
requirements of all partners vis a vis the
project. An annex per partner with each
city budget will be signed by ach partner.
The LP adapts this document as the
Charter of Comitment to highlight
USER-specific expectations. Any specific
commitment taken by a partner as regards
the transnational dimension of the project
will be specified in the annexe (for eg
hosting a seminar or leading a workshop
group).
Page 80 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Audit trail documents
URBACT II
Submitted version
document
1
It is a sheet that each partner must fill and
which contains answers to a series of
standard questions regarding project
administrative and financial framework and
organisation ; it is intended to check the
general soudness of the features of project
management adopted at city level and also
to facilitate potential controls. New
partners from phase 2 will have to provide
their audit trail document in time for
transmittal by LP to the Urbact Secretariate
before the end of March 2013. The initial
partners of phase 1 already provided an
audit trail document which is sufficient,
unless changes make a new audit trail
document necessary.
Letters of approval of first level controllers document
1
FLC are compulsory to carry-out
expenditure control of every partner
(mainly coherent with the project, budget,
eligibility and national rules). For partners
from Member States which have not
pre-assigned a first level controler
(decentralized system), the partner needs to
propose a First Level Controller of its
choice by filling in a checklist (to test the
profile), which it sends to a national
approbation body. If the person suits
requirements, the national approbation
body establishes a letter of approval which
is directly sent to the URBACT
Secretariate.
1st progress report
1
Every 6 months, the LP will provide
(through Presage CTE) a progress report to
explain and show where the project stands
in terms of work plan accomplishments and
of production of corresponding
deliverables.
1st period should be : Feb 2013-Aug 2013
report
Page 81 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
URBACT II
Submitted version
2nd progress report
report
1
Every 6 months, the LP will provide
(through Presage CTE) a progress report to
explain and show where the project stands
in terms of work plan accomplishments and
of production of corresponding
deliverables.
2nd period should be Sep 2013 - Mar 2013
3rd progress report
report
1
Every 6 months, the LP will provide
(through Presage CTE) a progress report to
explain and show where the project stands
in terms of work plan accomplishments and
of production of corresponding
deliverables.
3rd period should be apr 2014
4th progress report
report
1
Every 6 months, the LP will provide
(through Presage CTE) a progress report to
explain and show where the project stands
in terms of work plan accomplishments and
of production of corresponding
deliverables.
4th period should be may 2014-> oct 2014
Final report
report
1
It is the report which will complete
reporting at the end of the project and
recompile + synthesize the material from
previous progress reports in order to give
an overall information on effective project
accomplishments throughout
implementation phase.
Page 82 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
URBACT II
Submitted version
1st General Certificate and statement of
expenditure
report
1
Every 6 months, together with the progress
report , the LP will provide (through
Presage CTE) the certificate and
statement of expenditure which is the
'financial translation' of activities carried
out over the given period. It is a
compilation of expenditures from all cities
(spent and controlled at local level). This is
a component - with the progress report - of
the payment claim to claim ERDF.
2nd General Certificate and statement of
expenditure
report
1
Every 6 months, together with the progress
report , the LP will provide (through
Presage CTE) the certificate and
statement of expenditure which is the
'financial translation' of activities carried
out over the given period. It is a
compilation of expenditures from all cities
(spent and controlled at local level). This is
a component - with the progress report - of
the payment claim to claim ERDF.
3rd General Certificate and statement of
expenditure
report
1
Every 6 months, together with the progress
report , the LP will provide (through
Presage CTE) the certificate and
statement of expenditure which is the
'financial translation' of activities carried
out over the given period. It is a
compilation of expenditures from all cities
(spent and controlled at local level). This is
a component - with the progress report - of
the payment claim to claim ERDF.
Page 83 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
URBACT II
Submitted version
4th General Certificate and statement of
expenditure
report
1
Every 6 months, together with the progress
report , the LP will provide (through
Presage CTE) the certificate and
statement of expenditure which is the
'financial translation' of activities carried
out over the given period. It is a
compilation of expenditures from all cities
(spent and controlled at local level). This is
a component - with the progress report - of
the payment claim to claim ERDF.
Cities certificates & statements of
expenditure
report
45
To be created locally in Presage CTE by
each project officer, in order to be
integrated into the general sheet by the LP
for every reporting period.
Management File-sharing platform
web site and
collaborative tools
1
A management file sharing platform : to
centralize main URBACT documents &
formalized productions of the projects,
including communication material : for
consultation and dowloading purposes ; the
place for partners to put their material to
feed progress reports.
USER management LP e-mail account
web site and
collaborative tools
1
To 'isolate' USER project exchanges
between LP and its partners from any other
business. Will faciliate exchnages between
an increased number of partners in
implementation phase, generating many
messages.
Final certificate & statement of
expenditures
report
1
Same as the 6 monthy certificates &
statements, only it is to ask for the last
ERDF funds of the project (and maybe also
allows to summarize all the project
expenditures from the beginning).
Page 84 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Organisation of 3 thematic seminars
Submitted version
meeting
3
Organisation of thematic seminar to deepen
the focus according to the 3 sub-theme of
the project :
- Copenhagen in Marche 2013,
- Riga in July 2013
- Lisbon in January 2014
Confernce will lenght 2 day (day 1
knowledge day open to exteranl)
Organisation of 9 Workshops
meeting
9
Worskhops will be organised october
2013, April 2014 and November 2014.
They will join 3 groups of 3 Cities to
deepen the LAPs and exchanges on
difficulties and findings with a peer review
process. Each City will host one
Workshop.
Organisation of 3 consolidation seminars
meeting
3
During the 2nd part of the project, 3
Consolidation seminars (July 2014 in
Krakow, February 2015 in Paris and April
2015 in Grenoble) will allow to finalize
finding of USER and Final outputs of the
project to be presented at the Final
Conference
FINAL CONFERENCE
meeting
1
The Final Conference (Grenoble - tbc - in
April 2015) will be an open events with an
European target with the aim to present
results of USER project and exchange on
the role of Public Space on the Sustainable
City of tomorrow
Management sessions
meeting
4
During seminars 1,3,4 and 6 : an item on
the seminar agenda wil be specifically
dedicated to administrative and finacial
issues of the project, always with a
powerpoint presentation.
- XI - (XI) PROJECT FINANCE
URBACT II
Page 85 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
1. (XI.1) Project finance
ERDF
Name of partner
ERDF
% ERDF
Public contributor
Total
EX ANTE
State
Region
Local
Other public
financing
Private
Public total
financement
Grenoble Alpes Metropole
agglomeration community
135,310.00 €
70.00 %
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
57,990.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
57,990.00 €
193,300.00 €
City of Malaga
64,360.00 €
80.00 %
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
16,090.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
16,090.00 €
80,450.00 €
City of Pescara
64,645.00 €
70.00 %
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
27,705.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
27,705.00 €
92,350.00 €
City of Lublin
37,040.00 €
80.00 %
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
9,260.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
9,260.00 €
46,300.00 €
City of Krakow
36,520.00 €
80.00 %
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
9,130.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
9,130.00 €
45,650.00 €
City of Dresden
60,400.00 €
80.00 %
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
15,100.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
15,100.00 €
75,500.00 €
City of Copenhagen
60,998.00 €
70.00 %
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
26,142.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
26,142.00 €
87,140.00 €
Lisbon Municipality
42,700.00 €
70.00 %
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
18,300.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
18,300.00 €
61,000.00 €
City of Riga
39,904.00 €
80.00 %
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
9,976.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
9,976.00 €
49,880.00 €
Sub total
541,877.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
189,693.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
189,693.00 €
731,570.00 €
Total
541,877.00 €
74.07
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
189,693.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
189,693.00 €
731,570.00 €
Total %
74.07 %
74.07 %
0.00 %
0.00 %
0.00 %
100.00 %
0.00 %
0.00 %
25.93 %
100 %
Total
Legal basis
2. (XI.2) Legal basis for decision of funding
ERDF
Name of partner
URBACT II
Public contributor
Page 86 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Grenoble Alpes Metropole
agglomeration community
City of Malaga
City of Pescara
City of Lublin
URBACT II
Submitted version
ERDF
135,310.00 €
EX ANTE
0.00 €
State
0.00 €
Region
0.00 €
Local
57,990.00 €
Other public financing
0.00 €
ERDF
64,360.00 €
EX ANTE
0.00 €
State
0.00 €
Region
0.00 €
Local
16,090.00 €
Other public financing
0.00 €
ERDF
64,645.00 €
EX ANTE
0.00 €
State
0.00 €
Region
0.00 €
Local
27,705.00 €
Other public financing
0.00 €
ERDF
37,040.00 €
EX ANTE
0.00 €
135,310.00 €
ERDF
57,990.00 €
Grenoble Alpes
Metropole
agglomeration
community
64,360.00 €
ERDF
16,090.00 €
City of Malaga
64,645.00 €
ERDF
27,705.00 €
City of Pescara
37,040.00 €
ERDF
Page 87 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
City of Krakow
City of Dresden
City of Copenhagen
URBACT II
Submitted version
State
0.00 €
Region
0.00 €
Local
9,260.00 €
Other public financing
0.00 €
ERDF
36,520.00 €
EX ANTE
0.00 €
State
0.00 €
Region
0.00 €
Local
9,130.00 €
Other public financing
0.00 €
ERDF
60,400.00 €
EX ANTE
0.00 €
State
0.00 €
Region
0.00 €
Local
15,100.00 €
Other public financing
0.00 €
ERDF
60,998.00 €
EX ANTE
0.00 €
State
0.00 €
Region
0.00 €
Local
26,142.00 €
Other public financing
0.00 €
9,260.00 €
City of Lublin
36,520.00 €
ERDF
9,130.00 €
City of Krakow
60,400.00 €
ERDF
15,100.00 €
City of Dresden
60,998.00 €
ERDF
26,142.00 €
City of Copenhagen
Page 88 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Lisbon Municipality
City of Riga
Submitted version
ERDF
42,700.00 €
EX ANTE
0.00 €
State
0.00 €
Region
0.00 €
Local
18,300.00 €
Other public financing
0.00 €
ERDF
39,904.00 €
EX ANTE
0.00 €
State
0.00 €
Region
0.00 €
Local
9,976.00 €
Other public financing
0.00 €
42,700.00 €
ERDF
18,300.00 €
Lisbon Municipality
39,904.00 €
ERDF
9,976.00 €
City of Riga
3. (XI.3) Expenditure per year and main budget line
URBACT II
Expenditure category
2013
2014
2015
Total
%
Project coordination
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Personnel
110,000.00 €
124,000.00 €
41,945.00 €
275,945.00 €
37.72 %
Meetings organisation
31,000.00 €
34,800.00 €
11,550.00 €
77,350.00 €
10.57 %
Travel and accommodation
59,000.00 €
67,000.00 €
22,700.00 €
148,700.00 €
20.33 %
Page 89 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Communication and dissemination
16,200.00 €
32,500.00 €
32,472.00 €
81,172.00 €
11.10 %
External expertise
58,500.00 €
66,000.00 €
21,903.00 €
146,403.00 €
20.01 %
Equipment
2,000.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
2,000.00 €
0.27 %
URBACT Local Support Groups
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Managing Authorities
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Total
276,700.00 €
324,300.00 €
130,570.00 €
731,570.00 €
100 %
%
37.82 %
44.33 %
17.85 %
100 %
-
4. (XI.4) Expenditure per year and source
Contributo
r nature
ERDF
URBACT II
2013
2014
2015
Total
%
ERDF
204,952.00 240,200.00 96,725.00 € 541,877.00 74.07 %
€
€
€
EX ANTE
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
State
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Region
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Local
71,748.00 € 84,100.00 € 33,845.00 € 189,693.00 25.93 %
€
Other public 0.00 €
financing
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Private
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
0.00 €
Page 90 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Swiss Fund Swiss Fund 0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
State
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Region
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Local
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Other public 0.00 €
financing
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Private
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Norway
Fund
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
State
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Region
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Local
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Other public 0.00 €
financing
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Private
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 %
Total
276,700.00 324,300.00 130,570.00 731,570.00 100 %
€
€
€
€
%
37.82 %
Norway
Fund
44.33 %
17.85 %
100 %
-
5. (XI.5) Project cost per budget line
Expenditure category
Subcategories
Total
Project coordination
URBACT II
Page 91 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Personnel
Meetings organisation
Travel and accommodation
Communication and dissemination
External expertise
Equipment
URBACT II
Submitted version
Lead partner project officer
54,000.00 €
Lead partner financial officer
27,000.00 €
Lead partner communication officer
9,000.00 €
Partners internal project management team
185,945.00 €
Total
275,945.00 €
Workshop & seminar meetings
33,130.00 €
ULSG meetings
44,220.00 €
Total
77,350.00 €
Lead expert travels
13,700.00 €
Lead partner travels
15,950.00 €
Partners travels
119,050.00 €
Total
148,700.00 €
Lead partner transnational communication
38,000.00 €
Partners communication
43,172.00 €
Total
81,172.00 €
Externalized project management & coordination
41,000.00 €
LAP and/or ULSG expertise
80,398.00 €
First level controls
5,005.00 €
Transnational expertise
20,000.00 €
Total
146,403.00 €
Equipment needs under work package 3
2,000.00 €
Total
2,000.00 €
Page 92 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
URBACT Local Support Groups
Managing Authorities
Global budget
731,570.00 €
6. (XI.6) Expenditure breakdown per objective and main budget line
Work package 1 – Project management
Work package 2 – Transnational exchange and Work package 3 – Impact on local policies and Work package 4 – Communication and
learning
practices
dissemination
Total
Project
coordination
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
Personnel
62,992.00 €
95,976.00 €
95,979.00 €
20,998.00 €
275,945.00
€
Meetings
organisation
0.00 €
33,130.00 €
44,220.00 €
0.00 €
77,350.00 €
Travel and
0.00 €
accommodation
137,000.00 €
11,700.00 €
0.00 €
148,700.00
€
Communication 0.00 €
and
dissemination
0.00 €
0.00 €
81,172.00 €
81,172.00 €
External
expertise
46,005.00 €
20,000.00 €
80,398.00 €
0.00 €
146,403.00
€
Equipment
0.00 €
0.00 €
2,000.00 €
0.00 €
2,000.00 €
URBACT Local 0.00 €
Support Groups
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
Managing
Authorities
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
0.00 €
URBACT II
Page 93 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Total
108,997.00 €
URBACT II
286,106.00 €
Submitted version
234,297.00 €
102,170.00 €
731,570.00
€
Page 94 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- XII - (XII) DECLARATION OF MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURE
1. (XII.1) Declaration of maximum amount of expenditure to be certified at the end
of the Development phase
I hereby, as signing person of this Final Application form and on behalf of the Lead Partner, attest on my honour that the
project development phase (phase I) will be closed with a total and final certified expenditure (from the beginning until the
administrative closure of phase I) that amounts to maximum :
68,430.00 €
This total amount will correspond to the following breakdown per category of expenditure :
Expenditure category
Total
Project coordination
0.00 €
Personnel
Meetings organisation
Travel and accommodation
29,450.00 €
7,000.00 €
25,280.00 €
Communication and dissemination
4,000.00 €
External expertise
2,700.00 €
Equipment
0.00 €
URBACT Local Support Groups
0.00 €
Managing Authorities
0.00 €
Total
68,430.00 €
I am aware that, at the end of the development phase (phase I), my project will not be allowed to declare and certify more than
the amounts per category of expenditure as indicated in the breakdown table above. All exceeding expenditure will not be
accepted by the URBACT II Managing Authority.
I am also aware that the sum between the maximum amount of expenditure that will be claimed for phase I and the proposed
budget for the implementation phase (phase II) must not exceed the ceiling established for the maximum budget of a thematic
network.
URBACT II
Page 95 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- XIII - (XIII) BANK INFORMATION
1. (XIII.1) Bank information
Partner
Bank info.
Grenoble Alpes Bank name
Metropole
agglomeration
community
BANQUE DE FRANCE- GRENOBLE TRESORERIE DE GRENOBLE
MUNICIPALE
City of Malaga
Adress
8-10 avenue Doyen Louis WEIL 496
38016 GRENOBLE CEDEX 1
Bank code
30001
Account number
C3800000000
IBAN number
FR76 3000 1004 19C3 8000 0000 075
SWIFT number
BDFEFRPPCT
Internal reference
cle RIB 75
Account holder
Trésorerie de Grenoble Municipale
Bank name
BBVA
Adress
Marqués de Larios, 14- 1ª planta
Bank code
0182 5918 47
Account number
0000779451
IBAN number
ES63
SWIFT number
BBVA ESMM XXX
Internal reference
Account holder
City of Pescara Bank name
AYTO. MÁLAGA
Caripe spa
Adress
Corso Vittorio Emanuele, 102
Bank code
65122
Account number
340
IBAN number
IT27M0624515410000000000340
SWIFT number
BPALIT41251
Internal reference
City of Lublin
Account holder
COMUNE DI PESCARA
Bank name
Polska Kasa Opieki SA
Adress
Ul. Krolewsja 20-109
Lublin Poland
Bank code
URBACT II
Page 96 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Account number
50 1240 1503 1111 0010 0125 3585
IBAN number
Pl50 1240 1503 1111 0010 0125 3585
SWIFT number
PKOPPLPW
Submitted version
Internal reference
Account holder
Urzad miasta Lublin
City of Krakow Bank name
Adress
Bank code
Account number
IBAN number
SWIFT number
Internal reference
Account holder
City of Dresden Bank name
City of
Copenhagen
Ostsachsische Sparkasse Dresden
Adress
Guntzplatz 5, 01307 Desden GERMANY
Bank code
85050300
Account number
3120000018
IBAN number
DE67850503003120000018
SWIFT number
OSDDDE81
Internal reference
ST61139999
Account holder
Landeshauptstadt Dresden
Bank name
Danske Bank
Adress
Holmens Kanal 2-12
Bank code
3100
Account number
0007087500
IBAN number
DK3730000007087500
SWIFT number
DABADKKK
Internal reference
Account holder
Lisbon
Municipality
Bank name
Caixa Geral de Depósitos
Adress
Rua do Ouro n.º 49
1100-060 Lisboa
Bank code
Account number
URBACT II
0697588546939
Page 97 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
City of Riga
IBAN number
PT50 0035 0697 0058
SWIFT number
CDGIP TLP
Internal reference
URBACT II projecto USER
Account holder
Município de Lisboa
Bank name
Nordea Bank Finland Plc Latvijas filiāle
Adress
K. Valdemara St. 62, Riga, LV-1013, Latvia
Submitted version
Bank code
Account number
LB310101800
IBAN number
LV47NDEA0030101130013
SWIFT number
NDEALV2X
Internal reference
Account holder
Riga City Council Finance Department
- XIV - (XIV) DETAILED INFORMATION ON THE LEAD PARTNER AND
PROJECT PARTNERS
1. (XIV.1) Detailed information on the Lead partner and Project partners
Lead Partner Grenoble Alpes Metropole agglomeration community
Contact list
Partner Institution
Grenoble Alpes Metropole agglomeration
community
Address
Le Forum
3, rue Malakoff
Postcode
38031
City
GRENOBLE cedex 01
Area
Rhône-Alpes
Country
FRANCE
Name
Ms PREDAL Claire
Type
Project Coordinator
Service
Territorial Cohesion (within Solidarity
Department)
Function
Phone number
Mobile phone
Fax
URBACT II
Page 98 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Email
Name
M. TOURNAIRE Guillaume
Type
Project Coordinator
Service
Territorial strategy
Function
Project coordinator
Phone number
+ 33 4 76 59 57 06
Mobile phone
+ 33 6 29 75 72 79
Fax
Email
guillaume.tournaire@lametro.fr
Name
Ms CASTELLO Elodie
Type
Finance Officer
Service
Management service of Solidarity
Department
Function
Administrative and financial manager
Phone number
+ 33 4 76 59 58 29
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
elodie.castello@lametro.fr
Name
M. REDON Jean-Christophe
Type
Certifying Body
Service
Financial Auditing
Function
Finnacial auditor
Phone number
+ 33 4 76 59 40 02
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
jean-christophe.redon@lametro.fr
Name
M. CAEN Simon
Type
Local coordinator
Service
Territorial Cohesion
Function
Metro Officer specializing in deprived
areas neighborhood managament
Phone number
+ 33 4 76 59 57 09
Mobile phone
URBACT II
Page 99 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Fax
Email
simon.caen@lametro.fr
Name
M. RUIZ Eric
Type
Local coordinator
Service
Territorial Cohesion (within Solidarity
Department)
Function
Head of Territorial Cohesion service
Phone number
+ 33 4 76 59 57 80
Mobile phone
+ 33 6 25 25 93 98
Fax
Email
eric.ruiz@lametro.fr
Name
M. GUERIN Valerie
Type
Communication Officer
Service
Communication department
Function
communication projects officer
Phone number
+ 33 4 76 59 56 43
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
valerie.guerin@lametro.fr
Partner Institution
City of Malaga
Address
Avenida Cervantes, 4
Postcode
29016
City
MALAGA
Area
Andalucía
Country
SPAIN
Name
Ms OLIVA Begoña
Type
Project Coordinator
Service
European Programme
Function
Project officer
Partner City of Malaga
Contact list
URBACT II
Page 100 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Phone number
Submitted version
+34 951 928 833
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
programaseuropeos3@malaga.eu
Name
Ms ALCARAZO Maria Dolores
Type
Local coordinator
Service
Social Services in historical Centre
District
Function
Technician
Phone number
+34 951 927 807
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
Name
M. GIL Cristobal
Type
Local coordinator
Service
Social Services in historical Centre
District
Function
Director Social Services CENTRE
Phone number
+34 951 927 815
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
Name
M. MARÍN Pedro
Type
Local coordinator
Service
European Programmes
Function
Phone number
+34 951 928 833
Mobile phone
Fax
+34 951 926 646
Email
Partner City of Pescara
Partner Institution
URBACT II
City of Pescara
Page 101 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Contact list
Address
Piazza Italia n.1
Postcode
65121
City
PESCARA
Area
Abruzzo
Country
ITALY
Name
M. MOLISANI Marco
Type
Project Coordinator
Service
Cabinet of the mayor
Function
Director
Phone number
00 39 854 283 608
Submitted version
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
Name
Ms ANTONIOLI Piera
Type
Finance Officer
Service
European Policies Department
Function
Financial officer
Phone number
00 39 854 283 732
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
+ 39 0854 283 299
Name
M. MORELLI Nevio
Type
Local coordinator
Service
Town planning department
Function
Town planning Officer
Phone number
00 39 854 283 608
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
Partner City of Lublin
URBACT II
Page 102 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Partner Institution
Submitted version
City of Lublin
Address
Postcode
City
Contact list
Area
Lubelskie
Country
POLAND
Name
M. KLOS Monika
Type
Project Coordinator
Service
Non-investment Projects Department
Function
Deputy director of service
Phone number
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
mklos@lublin.eu
Name
M. SZELAG Joanna
Type
Project Coordinator
Service
International cooperation unit
Function
Manager
Phone number
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
jszelag@lublin.eu
Name
M. GRZESZCZUK Daniel
Type
Local coordinator
Service
Function
Phone number
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
Partner City of Krakow
URBACT II
Page 103 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Partner Institution
Submitted version
City of Krakow
Address
Postcode
City
Contact list
Area
Malopolskie
Country
POLAND
Name
Ms BIERNAT Natalia
Type
Project Coordinator
Service
Function
Phone number
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
Natalia.Biernat@um.krakow.pl
Name
Ms MYSONA-MOZDZIERZ Monika
Type
Finance Officer
Service
Function
Phone number
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
Name
Ms PISKIEWICZ-BYCZYNSKA Beata
Type
Local coordinator
Service
Function
Phone number
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
Partner City of Dresden
URBACT II
Page 104 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Contact list
Partner Institution
City of Dresden
Address
City Planning Office, Urban renewal
Section,
P.O. Box 120020
Postcode
D-01001
City
Dresden
Area
Dresden
Country
GERMANY
Name
M. BULS Bruno
Type
Project Coordinator
Service
City Planning Office Urban Renewal
section
Function
project coordinator
Phone number
+ 49 351 488 3509
Mobile phone
+ 49 172 3403921
Fax
+ 49 351 488 3816
Email
BBuls@dresden.de
Name
Ms SUREK Jutta
Type
Finance Officer
Service
City Planning Office, Legal &
administration section
Function
Officer in charge of budget
Phone number
+ 49 351 488 3412
Submitted version
Mobile phone
Fax
+ 49 351 488 3813
Email
Name
Ms SUREK Jutta
Type
Finance Officer
Service
City Planning Office, Legal &
administration section
Function
Officer in charge of budget
Phone number
+ 49 351 488 3412
Mobile phone
Fax
URBACT II
+ 49 351 488 3813
Page 105 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
Email
Partner City of Copenhagen
Contact list
Partner Institution
City of Copenhagen
Address
Bernstorffsgade 17
Postcode
1592
City
Copenhagen V
Area
Danmark
Country
DENMARK
Name
Ms BOESEN Sia
Type
Project Coordinator
Service
Technical and Environmental
Administration
Function
Project manager
Phone number
+45 3263 0290
Mobile phone
+45 51626278
Fax
Email
A32Z@tmf.kk.dk
Name
M. LEONARDSEN Øystein
Type
Project Coordinator
Service
Tecnical and Environmental
Administration
Function
Head of secretariat
Phone number
+45 3263 0290
Mobile phone
+45 20546919
Fax
Email
oysleo@tmf.kk.dk
Partner Institution
Lisbon Municipality
Address
Praça do Município n.º 1
Postcode
1100
Partner Lisbon Municipality
URBACT II
Page 106 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Contact list
City
Lisboa
Area
Lisboa
Country
PORTUGAL
Name
M. BRITO Miguel
Type
Project Coordinator
Service
GT BIP/ZIP
Function
Project manager
Phone number
+ 35 21 322 73 60
Mobile phone
+351 96 280 05 05
Submitted version
Fax
Email
miguel.brito@cm-lisboa.pt
Name
M. AGOSTINHO Santiago
Type
Finance Officer
Service
GT BIP/ZIP
Function
Finance officer
Phone number
+ 35 21 326 12 02
Mobile phone
Fax
Email
ricardo.santiago@cm-lisboa.pt
Partner Institution
City of Riga
Partner City of Riga
Address
Postcode
City
Contact list
URBACT II
Area
Latvija
Country
LATVIA
Name
Ms KOTOVICA Nika
Type
Project Coordinator
Service
Urban economics dividion
Page 107 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Function
Head - Project Administrative officer
Phone number
371 6718 1424
Mobile phone
+ 371 2922 6404
Fax
+ 371 6701 2922
Email
nika.kotovica@riga.lv
Name
M. KUSKIS Aigars
Type
Project Coordinator
Service
Historic Centre Planning Division
Function
Chief territorial planner, deputy head
Phone number
+371 6703 7936
Mobile phone
+ 371 2927 6491
Fax
+ 371 6701 2922
Email
aigars.kuskis@riga.lv
Name
Ms EISAKA Marita
Type
Finance Officer
Service
Urban Economics Division
Function
Deputy Head of Urban Economics
Division
Phone number
+371 6703 7771
Mobile phone
+ 371 2943 8916
Fax
+ 371 6701 2922
Submitted version
Email
URBACT II
Page 108 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- XV - (XV) SIGNATURE
1. (XV.1) Signature of the Lead Partner / project coordinator and of the Elected
representative
Signature of the Lead Partner / project coordinator :
Name (capital letters) :
Position :
Date :
Signature of the Elected representative
Name (capital letters) :
Position :
Date :
Official stamp
URBACT II
Page 109 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- XVI - (XVI) ANNEX 1
1. (XVI.1) ANNEX 1 – Eligibility criteria for final application for thematic networks
oThe proposal is submitted respecting the procedure outlined in the call for proposals and within 6 months from approval by
the Monitoring Committee for Thematic networks.
oThe proposal is complete in terms of number of documents required and includes the Final Application. The list of required
documents will be provided to approved projects, along with guidelines for Final Application. It will include a letter of
commitment for the Lead partner and 1 letter of commitment per partner (all letters shall be signed by an elected representative
when appropriate).
oThe proposal is complete in terms of information and data required in the documents (all sections in the Final Application,
letters of commitment and other documents have been properly filled in according to the instructions).
oAll the documents required are signed, dated and stamped by the candidate partners.
oThe proposal refers to a project bringing together a minimum of 8 and a maximum of 12 public authorities, from at least 3
Member and Partner States, which have designated a city as candidate lead partner.
oThe proposed partnership is balanced in terms of geographical origin with candidate partners from both Convergence
objective regions and Competitiveness objective regions. The balance is set at 50% Convergence – 50 % Competitiveness in
the case of an even number of partners; 50% +1 Convergence or 50%+1 Competitiveness in the case of an odd number of
partners. Partners from Norway and Switzerland shall not be taken into account when setting this balance.
oThe proposed partnership does not include more than 3 non-city partners.
oAll candidate partners are beneficiaries of the programme as defined in the Operational Programme.
oThe candidate partners are not partners in more than one existing URBACT II project.
oThe candidate lead partner is not Lead partner in an existing URBACT II project.
oThe proposal addresses one of the topics defined for this call for proposals in terms of thematic coverage.
oRegarding the budget, the sum between the maximum amount of expenditure that will be claimed for phase I and the
proposed budget for the implementation phase (phase II) must not exceed the ceiling established for the maximum budget of a
thematic network.
URBACT II
Page 110 / 111
USER Phase II (Ref : 5550 | Version : 1 | Submitted project)
Submitted version
- XVII - (XVII) ANNEX 2
1. (XVII.1) ANNEX 2 - Realisation indicators
Group of indicators : project Call 3
Indicator
Target
Specific indicators of the priority
Number of transnational Exchange and
Learning Seminars held by approved
projects
URBACT II
Quantitative
7 (meeting)
Number of Male participants in Local
Quantitative
Support Groups set up by partners involved
in completed projects (55% of 2475)
55 (male)
Number of Female participants in Local
Quantitative
Support Groups set up by partners involved
in completed projects (45% of 2475)
45 (female)
Number of Local Action Plans having
Quantitative
secured funding for the implementation of
all or part of their plan
6 (local action plan)
% of Local Action Plans securing
Structural Fund assistance (ERDF or ESF
Operational programmes)
Quantitative
6 (%)
% of Local Action Plans partially or fully
implemented in the programme period
Quantitative
33 (%)
Page 111 / 111